2005 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 6-15-2005 

# In re: Georges P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 04-3080

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2005 D e c i sion s b y an author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " In r e: Ge org e s " (2005). 2005 D e cisio n s . P ape r 1011. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005/1011NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT N o. 04- 3080 I N RE : G EO RG E A . G EO RG ES, D ebt or G EO RG E A . G EO RG ES, A ppel l ant

v. J EAN D. GEO RG ES C H R IS T IN E C . S H U B E R T , E S Q . C H A P T E R 7 T R U S T E E , T rus t ee

ON AP P E AL F RO M T HE UNI T E D S T AT E S DI S T RI CT CO UR T F OR T HE

E A S T E R N D IS T R IC T O F P E N N S Y L V A N IA ( D i s t . C our tN o. 03- cv- 05225) D i s tr i ctC our tJ udge: T he H onor abl e C l ar ence C . N ew comer Subm i t t ed U nderT hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

M ay26, 2005 B efor e: SC I R I C A , C hi ef J udge, and A L I T O and G A R T H , C i r cui tJ udges

( O pi ni on Fi l ed: J une 15, 2005)2 OPI NI ON O F THE COURT P E R C U R I A M: B e c a u s e w e w ri te o n ly f o r t h e p a rt ie s , w e d o n o t s e t f o rt h th e f a c ts o f th is c a s e . G e o rg e A . G e o rg e s (“ M r. G e o rg e s” ) c h a llen g e s th e D istric t C o u rt’s f in d in g th a t h is a p p e a l o f th e d is m is s a l to re o p e n h is b a n k ru p tc yc a s e u n d e r 1 1 U .S .C . § 5 2 4 w a s m o o t. W e have j ur i s di ct i on pur s uantt o 28 U . S. C . § 158( d) and 28 U . S. C . § 1291. Forthe re a so n sta ted b e lo w , w e a f f irm th e D istric t C o u rt.

I. W e r evi ew a di s t r i ctcour t ’ s r evi ew of a f i nal or derof a ba nkrupt cycour ti n a p len a ryf a sh io n . In re T ra n s W o rld A irline s, In c ., 1 4 5 F .3 d 1 2 4 , 1 3 0 (3 d C ir. 1 9 9 8 ). T h is i ncl udes a di s t r i ctcour t ’ s deci s i on on m oot nes s . St at e of N . J . , D ept . of Env’tPr ot ect i on an d E n erg yv . H eldo r Ind u s. Inc . , 9 8 9 F . 2 d 7 0 2 , 7 0 5 (3d . C ir . 1 9 9 3 ). II. M r . G eor ges ar gues t hatt he r eopeni ng of hi s bankrupt cycas e s ol el yforthe p u rp o s e o f

f ilin g a c o m p la in t to d e te rm in e d is c h a rg e a b ility o f th e d e b t u n d e r 1 1 U .S .C . § 523( a) does notm oothi s appea l of a pr i ordeni al of a mot i on t o r eopen hi s cas e t o enfor ce di s char ge under11 U . S. C . § 524. M r . G eor ges pr emi s es hi s ar gum enton t he as s ert i on t hatr eopeni ng a bankrupt cycas e under11 U . S. C . § 523( a) does notaddr es s the s uper s edi ng ques t i on of w hethert he pr os ecut i on of a pe ndi ng equi t abl e di s t r i but i on act i onbr oughtbyhi s ex- w i fe s houl d have be en s t ay ed byhi s M ay6 bankrupt cydi s char ge

p u rs u a n t to 1 1 U .S .C . § 5 2 4 . U nderA r t i cl e I I I , § 2, of the U ni t ed St at es C ons t i tut i on, fede r al cour t s have the abi l i t yt o ent er t ai n onl ycas es and contr over s i es . A r t i cl e I I I r equi r es thatan ac tual contr over s yexi s tt hr ough al l s t ages of l i t i gat i on, i ncl udi ng appel l at e r evi ew . U ni t ed St at es v. K i s s i nger , 309 F. 3d 179, 180 ( 3d C i r . 2002) . A s a r es ul t , a ca s e s houl d be di s m i s s ed as m ootw her e “de vel opm ent s occurdur i ng the cour s e of a dj udi cat i on that el i m i nat e a pl ai nt i ff’ s per s onal s t ake i n t he out come of a s ui torpr eventa courtfr om bei ng abl e t o gr antt he r eques t ed r el i ef. . . . ” M orr i s v. N at i onal i s tM ovement , 273 F. 3d 5 2 7 , 5 3 3 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 1 ). M r. G e o rg e s’ a p p e a l o f th e B a n k ru p tcy C o u rt’s d e n ial o f h is m o tio n to re o p e n h is b an k rup tcyca se u n d er 1 1 U . S . C . § 5 2 4 is no w m o o t. T h e d isch arg e inju n cti o n M r. G e o rg e s’ 1 1 U .S .C . § 5 2 4 m o tio n re q u e ste d a g a in st h is e x -w if e ’s th e n p e n d in g e q u itab le di s t r i but i on cl ai m i n s t at e courtcan no l ongerbe gr ant ed s i nce the s t at e courthas s i nce iss u e d a n e q u itab le d istrib u tio n o rd e r. B e c a u se M r. G e o rg e ’s 1 1 U .S .C . § 5 2 4 m o tio n is now m oot , w e nee d notaddr es s w hethera debt ori n bankrupt cyfac i ng a pendi ng equi t abl e di s t r i but i on cl ai m t hathas noty etbeen di s pos ed of i n t he s t at e courti s ent i t l ed to th e d is c h a rg e o f

th e e q u ita b le d is tr ib u tio n c la im . F o r th e f o re g o in g re a so n , w e a f

f irm th e o rd e r o f

th e D istric t C o u rt.