DONALD F. KING, Trustee v. Mary Ella Johnson

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 24-1196
DONALD F. KING, Trustee,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
MARY ELLA JOHNSON,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Alexandria. Michael Stefan Nachmanoff, District Judge. (1:23-cv-00672-MSN-LRV)
Submitted: April 10, 2025 Decided: April 14, 2025
Before WILKINSON and RUSHING, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Mary Ella Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Donald F. King, ODIN FELDMAN &
PITTLEMAN, PC, Reston, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Mary Ella Johnson appeals the district court’s order dismissing her appeal from the
bankruptcy court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the bankruptcy trustee.
We dismiss the appeal as moot.
Johnson filed a notice of appeal to the district court from the bankruptcy court’s
summary judgment order and separately noted an appeal from the bankruptcy court’s
denial of her motion for reconsideration of the summary judgment order. The district court
dismissed the appeal from the summary judgment order on procedural grounds but
subsequently considered the merits of the summary judgment order as well as the
bankruptcy court’s denial of reconsideration and affirmed both orders. Because Johnson
has obtained the relief she seeks in this appeal—namely, a merits review by the district
court of the bankruptcy court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the
bankruptcy trustee—her appeal is moot. See Williams v. Ozmint, 716 F.3d 801, 809 (4th
Cir. 2013) (“A change in factual circumstances can moot a case on appeal, such as when
the plaintiff receives the relief sought.”). Accordingly, although we grant the Trustee’s
motion to file a surreply brief, we dismiss the appeal as moot. We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED

-- 2 of 2 --