LaDonna Humphrey v. Anthony Christopher
- Summarized by Jonathan Batiste , Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
- 7 months 1 day ago
- Case Type:
- Consumer
- Case Status:
- Reversed and Rendered
- Citation:
- No. 24-1854 (8th Circuit, Jul 29,2025) Published
- Tag(s):
-
- Ruling:
- The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit found that the district court erred by declining to dismiss Debtor’s appeal as statutorily moot. Parties must stay the sale of a bankruptcy estate’s property, pending appeal of the bankruptcy court’s approval of the sale, to challenge its validity. 11 U.S.C. § 363(m) moots any challenge to or reversal of a non-stayed completed sale of a bankruptcy estate’s property. Parties must seek stays of sales in bankruptcy courts under § 363(m). Debtor stayed the underlying state litigation, not the sale; her appeal is statutorily moot under § 363(m).
- Procedural context:
- Creditor sued Debtor in state court, and Debtor filed a counterclaim against Creditor. The state court decided in favor of Creditor, struck Debtor’s counterclaim, ordered Debtor to serve ten days in jail, and found Debtor liable to Creditor for $3,570,977.88 plus interest. Debtor appealed the state court decision and filed for chapter 7 bankruptcy after the trial. The bankruptcy court approved Creditor’s purchase of Debtor’s claims that became part of the bankruptcy estate. Debtor appealed the bankruptcy court’s decision to the district court after state authorities arrested Creditor. The state appellate court entered a stay of Debtor’s state appeal pending the resolution of her bankruptcy case. The district court held Debtor’s appeal in abeyance and, when the criminal charges against Creditor were dropped, decided in favor of Debtor. Creditor then appealed the district court’s decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit.
- Facts:
- Creditor hired Debtor in 2018 and fired her four months later for failure to meet expectations. Creditor then sued Debtor in state court, alleging various tort claims. Debtor claimed that Creditor fired her for making allegations of misconduct against Creditor and filed a counterclaim against Creditor. The state court found Debtor in contempt of court orders after she destroyed evidence. Debtor filed for bankruptcy in 2019 after the state court found her liable for all of Creditor’s tort claims against her. Debtor also appealed the state court’s decision. Creditor offered the Trustee $12,500 for Debtor’s claims that became part of the bankruptcy estate, and the Trustee filed a motion for approval of the sale. Debtor objected to the sale, but the bankruptcy court approved it. Creditor was then arrested on state criminal charges related to Debtor’s allegations in the state litigation. The state appellate court stayed Debtor’s state appeal. Debtor appealed the bankruptcy court’s decision to the district court in 2021. The district court held the bankruptcy appeal in abeyance until Creditor’s criminal charges were resolved. Creditor’s criminal charges were dropped, and the bankruptcy appeal reopened in 2023. The district court reversed the bankruptcy court’s decision in 2024. The district court considered whether defensive appellate rights are property of the bankruptcy estate under state law, but then declined to decide on the issue and concluded that the bankruptcy court abused its discretion by approving the sale. Creditor appealed the district court’s decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit, which focused on Creditor’s statutory argument and did not address other arguments. The court found that Debtor did not stay the sale despite it being required by § 363(m). Reversal of the bankruptcy court’s decision would not invalidate the consummated sale under § 363(m). The property sold had left the bankruptcy estate, and courts cannot supply remedies after that.
- Judge(s):
- Smith, Shepherd, and Kobes
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary. Please Sign In using your ABI Member credentials. Not a Member yet? Join ABI now - it is absolutely worth it!
