Bankruptcy
In re: Jean Leonard HARRIS, Debtor, Jean Leonard Harris, Appellant, v. Sandra J. Wittman, Trustee, Appellee
114 F. App'x 923·United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·2004
Before GOODWIN, WALLACE, and TROTT, Circuit Judges.
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
In re: Jean Leonard HARRIS, Debtor, Jean Leonard Harris, Appellant, v. Sandra J. Wittman, Trustee, Appellee.
No. 03-57023.
D.C. No. CV-03-01554-MLH/AJB.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 6, 2004.
Decided Dec. 10, 2004.
Jean Leonard Harris, Rancho Santa Fe, CA, pro se.
Gary B. Rudolph, Esq., Sparber, Ferguson, Ponder and Ryan, San Diego, CA, for Appellee.
Before GOODWIN, WALLACE, and TROTT, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
[MAJORITY]
MEMORANDUM
Jean Leonard Harris appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing as moot Harris’s appeal from the bankruptcy court’s order granting the Trustee’s motion to approve the sale of personal property. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158. After de novo review, Ewell v. Diebert (In re Ewell), 958 F.2d 276, 279 (9th Cir.1992), we affirm.
The district court properly concluded that Harris’s appeal was moot because the personal property had already been sold and the bankruptcy court’s conclusion that Jack Swain was a good faith purchaser was not clearly erroneous. See 11 U.S.C. § 363(m); Ewell, 958 F.2d at 279, 281.
Harris’s remaining contentions are without merit.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.