History
  • No items yet
midpage
Peli Hunt v. Elissa Miller
16-56784
| 9th Cir. | Jul 5, 2017
|
Check Treatment
|
Docket

*1 Before: PAEZ, BEA, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

Peli Popovich Hunt appeals pro se from the district court’s order affirming *2 the bankruptcy court’s order granting the chapter 7 trustee’s motion to pay mediation costs from estate funds. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). We review de novo the district court’s decision on appeal from the bankruptcy court and apply the same standards of review applied by the district court. In re Thorpe Insulation Co. , 677 F.3d 869, 879 (9th Cir. 2012). We affirm.

In the opening brief, Hunt fails to address how the bankruptcy court erred in approving the chapter trustee’s motion for disbursement of estate funds to pay certain mediation costs. As a result, Hunt has waived her challenge to the bankruptcy court’s order. See Smith v. Marsh , 194 F.3d 1045, 1052 (9th Cir. 1999) (“[O]n appeal, arguments not raised by a party in its opening brief are deemed waived.”); Greenwood v. FAA , 28 F.3d 971, 977 (9th Cir. 1994) (“We review only issues which are argued specifically and distinctly in a party’s opening brief.”).

All pending motions are denied.

AFFIRMED.

2 16-56784

[*] This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

[**] The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

Case Details

Case Name: Peli Hunt v. Elissa Miller
Court Name: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Date Published: Jul 5, 2017
Docket Number: 16-56784
Court Abbreviation: 9th Cir.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.