Court Opinion

ID: 4187295
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2017-07-20 03:02:11.431965+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:54:46.107542
License: Public Domain

Case: 16-15906   Date Filed: 07/19/2017   Page: 1 of 2

                                                         [DO NOT PUBLISH]

            IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

                    FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
                      ________________________

                            No. 16-15906
                        Non-Argument Calendar
                      ________________________

                  D.C. Docket No. 6:15-cv-02129-RBD,
                     Bkcy No. 6:14-bkc-03297-ABB

In Re: JAMES E. BAUMANN,
                                                             Debtor.
__________________________________________________________________
JAMES E. BAUMANN,
                                                            Plaintiff-Appellant,

                                  versus

PNC BANK, N.A., BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.,

                                                        Defendants-Appellees.

                      ________________________

               Appeal from the United States District Court
                   for the Middle District of Florida
                     ________________________

                             (July 19, 2017)
              Case: 16-15906    Date Filed: 07/19/2017   Page: 2 of 2

Before MARCUS, MARTIN, and EDMONDSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

      James Baumann, a Chapter 13 debtor proceeding pro se, appeals the district

court’s affirmance of the bankruptcy court’s final orders, confirming Baumann’s

Chapter 13 plan and denying Baumann’s motion for reconsideration. Briefly

stated, Baumann contends that the bankruptcy court modified impermissibly the

terms of his Chapter 13 plan when it issued the amended confirmation order.

      After the close of briefing in this appeal, Baumann dismissed voluntarily his

Chapter 13 case in the bankruptcy court. Because the issues raised on appeal

involve the terms of Baumann’s Chapter 13 plan, this appeal is rendered moot (no

controversy remains) by Baumann’s voluntary dismissal of his bankruptcy case.

See Neidich v. Salas, 783 F.3d 1215 (11th Cir. 2015) (concluding that “the

dismissal of a Chapter 13 case moots an appeal arising from the debtor’s

bankruptcy proceedings.”). We dismiss this appeal as moot.

      DISMISSED.

                                         2