Ziegenhagen

Ziegenhagen v. Dorsey

Good Law
258 F. App'x 154
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 7, 2007No. 05-36031California496 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Appellants Mark and Janet Ziegenhagen, First Call Mortgage & Investments, LLC, and G. Jefferson Campbell, Jr., P.C., appeal a decision by the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel, which affirmed the bankruptcy court’s order permitting a compromise agreement between Appellees Chapter 7 Trustee Tracy D. Trunnell and Lee D. Dorsey, trustee of the Dorsey Loving Trust, concerning certain property of the bankruptcy estate (the “Property”). We review de novo an appeal from the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel, Paulman v. Gateway Venture Partners III, L.P. (In re Filtercorp, Inc.), 163 F.3d 570, 576 (9th Cir.1998), and conduct an independent review of a bankruptcy court’s rulings. Racusin v. Am. Wagering, Inc. (In re Am. Wagering, Inc.), 493 F.3d 1067, 1071 (9th Cir.2007). We affirm.

1. We reject Dorsey’s contention that the appeal is moot. Should Appellants *155 prevail in their claims, disgorgement of monies received by Dorsey on the sale of the Property could be effective and equitable relief. See Sherman v. SEC (In re Sherman), 491 F.3d 948, 968 (9th Cir.2007) (holding that an appeal is not moot “so long as the appellate court [can] fashion relief that is both effective and equitable”…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.