DISCUSSION

It cannot reasonably be disputed that the case is moot. Daughter herself argues that a fraudulent transfer action is moot and must be dismissed if the plaintiff is no longer a creditor of the debtor-transferor.2 (Allard v. DeLorean (9th Cir. 1989) 884 F.2d 464, 466.) The usual practice when a case becomes moot pending appeal is dismissal of the appeal. (County of Fresno v. Shelton (1998) 66 Cal.App.4th 996, 1005.) “But involuntary dismissal of an appeal operates as an affirmance of the judgment below. [Citations.] If the appellate court wishes to avoid this result (for example, when the trial court granted relief that is rendered improper due to the mootness of the action), it can do so by reversing the judgment solely for the purpose of restoring the matter to the jurisdiction of the superior court with directions for that court to dismiss the action. [Citations.] This approach disposes of the case, not merely the proceeding that brought it to the appellate court. [Citation.]” (Ibid.) This resolution removes any implication that the ‘less-than-fully litigated judgment’ has any continuing validity or effect. (Coalition for a Sustainable Future in Yucaipa v. City of Yucaipa (2011) 198 Cal.App.4th 939, 944.) As there is no longer any basis for the judgment declaring the transfer null and void, reversal and remand with directions to dismiss is the proper disposition of this matter.

2 However, daughter suggests that we should nonetheless resolve the appeal on the merits. Specifically, daughter argues on appeal that the trial court erred in excluding evidence that purportedly would have shown that mother’s debt to GE had been satisfied at the time of trial. Daughter believes we should decide the issue of the relevance of her evidence, as the issue will arise again in a currently pending action between mother and GE for an accounting. While the issue of when GE was fully paid (and, therefore, if any overpayments were made) may be of continuing interest in the accounting action, it is not at issue in this case. This case consists of a single cause of action to set aside a fraudulent transfer; the undisputed fact that GE has been fully paid mandates dismissal of the action. 3

DISPOSITION

The judgment is reversed and the matter remanded to the trial court for dismissal of the action as moot. The parties are to bear their own costs on appeal.

RUBIN, J.

WE CONCUR:

BIGELOW, P. J.

GRIMES, J.

4