Document Type
Research Memorandum
Publication Date
2024
Abstract
(Excerpt)
The issue in this article is when an appeal from a bankruptcy court order is equitably moot. As to be discussed further infra, generally, courts seem to apply equitable mootness only in complex reorganizations, and there seems to be a trend of restricting the application of the doctrine.
...
Equitable mootness is similar to the concepts of waiver, forfeiture, or even estoppel. The underlying principle of this doctrine is that after time has passed since the implementation of an equitable judgment, the relief that an appellant seeks on appeal becomes "impractical, imprudent, and therefore inequitable." Further, courts aim to protect parties by dismissing an appeal of a bankruptcy confirmation for equitable mootness. Specifically, equitable mootness is meant to protect the debtor’s ability to advance from bankruptcy and other parties' good faith reliance interests in the execution of the bankruptcy plan.
The majority of courts apply the equitable mootness doctrine to deny the advancement of an appeal only in complex reorganization cases. Different jurisdictions use different tests to determine when equitable mootness should be applied. Recent decisions show a trend toward restricting the application of the doctrine.