In Re 1111 Minors Company, Debtor. B.K. Madan Ritu Madan Tony Madan v. Billy Glen Geller Arnold L. Kupetz

29 F.3d 633 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. In re 1111 MINORS COMPANY, Debtor. B.K. MADAN; Ritu Madan; Tony Madan, Appellants, v. Billy Glen GELLER; Arnold L. Kupetz, Appellees. No. 94-55006. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted July 18, 1994. * Decided July 25, 1994. Before: FARRIS, KOZINSKI, and NOONAN, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM *** 2 Baldev K., Ritu, and Tony Madan ("Madans") 1 appeal pro se the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel's ("BAP") dismissal of their appeal from the bankruptcy court as moot. The Madans appealed the bankruptcy court's order authorizing the trustee's sale of real property. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 158 (d), 2 and we affirm. 3 This court reviews questions of mootness de novo. Friends of the Payette v. Horseshoe Bend Hydroelectric Co., 988 F.2d 989, 996 (9th Cir.1993). We review the factual findings of the bankruptcy court for clear error and its conclusions of law de novo. Ewell v. Diebert (In re…