IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA 

No. 84172 

FILED 

APR 2 2 2022 

ELIZABETH A. BROWN 

CLERK OF PREME COURT 

VICTOR COVARRUBIAS, AN 

INDIVIDUAL, 

Appellant, 

vs. 

KELLY MCGHEE-PANE, F/K/A KELLY 

F. COVARRUBIAS, AN INDIVIDUAL, 

Res • ondent. 

BY 

DEPUTY CLERK 

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL 

On February 18, 2022, respondenes counsel filed a "Suggestion 

of Bankruptcy of Appellant Victor Covarrubiae informing this court that 

respondent filed an Involuntary Petition under Chapter 7 of Title 11 of the 

United States Code against Covarrubias in the United States Bankruptcy 

Court for the District of Nevada, thereby commencing a Chapter 7 

Bankruptcy, Case No. 22-10564-abl. The filing of a bankruptcy petition 

operates to stay, automatically, the "continuation" of any "judicial . . . action 

. . . against the debtor." 11 U.S.C. § 362(a)(1). An appeal, for purposes of 

the automatic stay, is considered a continuation of the action in the trial 

court. See Ingersoll-Rand Fin. Corp. v. Miller Mining Co., Inc., 817 F.2d 

1424 (9th Cir. 1987). Because Covarrubias was the defendant below, this 

court directed Covarrubias counsel to inform this court whether the 

automatic stay is applicable to this appeal. 

On April 6, 2022, Covarrubias' counsel filed a response. 

Counsel indicates that Covarrubias is represented by different counsel in 

the bankruptcy matter, however, a review of the bankruptcy docket shows 

that although Covarrubias' bankruptcy counsel has filed a motion to 

0.1,? - I 2 ago 
dismiss, the matter is still pending. It is counsel's view that the automatic 

stay is currently applicable to this appeal. We agree. 

Given the applicability of the automatic stay, this appeal may 

linger indefinitely on this coures docket pending final resolution of the 

bankruptcy proceedings. Accordingly, we conclude that judicial efficiency 

will be best served if this appeal is dismissed without prejudice. Because a 

dismissal without prejudice will not require this court to reach the merits of 

this appeal and is not inconsistent with the primary purposes of the 

bankruptcy stay—to provide protection for debtors and creditors—we 

further conclude that such dismissal will not violate the bankruptcy stay.' 

See Indep. Union of Flight Attendants v. Pan Am. World Airways, Inc., 966 

F.2d 457, 459 (9th Cir. 1992) (holding that the automatic stay does not 

preclude dismissal of an appeal so long as dismissal is "consistent with the 

purpose of the statute [11 U.S.C. §362(a)]; Dean v. Trans World Airlines, 

Inc., 72 F.3d 754, 755 (9th Cir. 1995) (holding that a post-bankruptcy 

petition dismissal will violate the automatic stay "where the decision to 

dismiss first requires the court to consider other issues presented by or 

related to the underlying case"). 

Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal. This dismissal is without 

prejudice to Covarrubias right to move for reinstatement of this appeal 

within 90 days of either the lifting of the bankruptcy stay or final resolution 

IThe automatic stay provides a debtor "with protection against 

hungry creditors" and gives the debtor a "breathing spell from its creditors" 

by stopping all collection efforts. Dean v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 72 F.3d 

754, 755 (9th Cir. 1995). Further, it assures creditors "that the debtor's 

other creditors are not racing to various courthouses to pursue independent 

remedies to drain the debtor's assets." Id. at 755-56. 

2 
of the bankruptcy proceedings if Covarrubias deems such a motion 

appropriate at that time. 

It is so ORDERED. 

"c2411°‘64-ja6**ell.."77J. 

Parraguirre 

 J 

Hardesty Stiglich 

a.t.eaA.,?n 

cc: Hon. Tara D. Clark Newberry, District Judge 

Janet Trost, Settlement Judge 

Law Office of Justin Patrick Stovall 

Garman Turner Gordon 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

3