N V. DAVID GOODRICH, No. 16-55679 (9th Cir. 2017)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED JUL 5 2017 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT In re: ROBERT W. HUNT, M.D., a Medical Corporation, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 16-55679 D.C. No. 2:15-cv-00667-AG Debtor. ______________________________ MEMORANDUM* PELI POPOVICH HUNT, Appellant, v. DAVID M. GOODRICH, Chapter 7 Trustee; PETER C. ANDERSON, United States Trustee, Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Andrew J. Guilford, District Judge, Presiding Submitted June 26, 2017** Before: PAEZ, BEA, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges. * 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). Peli Popovich Hunt appeals pro se from the district court’s orders denying her post-judgment motions “for rulings on leave to file as a vexatious litigant and return of bonds,” to disqualify the chapter 7 trustee, and for reconsideration. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 158(d) and 1291. We affirm. In the opening brief, Hunt fails to address how the district court erred in denying her motions. As a result, Hunt has waived her challenge to the district court’s orders. 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 16-55679

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.