Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Share your feedback on this Case Opinion Preview

Thank You For Submiting Feedback!

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

  • Case Opinion

Rev Op Group v. ML Manager LLC (In re Mortgs. Ltd.)

Rev Op Group v. ML Manager LLC (In re Mortgs. Ltd.)

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

January 16, 2014, Argued and Submitted, San Francisco, California; November 12, 2014, Filed

No. 12-15234, No. 12-15459

Opinion

 [*1213]  WALLACE, Senior Circuit Judge:

Mortgages Ltd. was a private lender for certain real estate investments in Arizona. Mortgages Ltd. raised money from investors to extend loans to real estate purchasers, secured by the purchased real estate, and acted as servicing agent for the loans and properties. The investors received "pass-through" fractional interests in the real estate that secured the loans and the resulting loan payments. The pass-through investors acquired an actual interest in each underlying loan.

On June 24, 2008, Mortgages Ltd. filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. The company was restructured through a confirmed bankruptcy plan. Pursuant to that plan, the entity ML Manager LLC (ML Manager), the appellee here, manages and operates the loans left in Mortgages Ltd.'s portfolio. ML Manager took a $20 million loan in "exit financing" to pay for expenses related to the completed bankruptcy. The bankruptcy plan was confirmed by the bankruptcy court in May 2009.

After confirmation, [**4]  a group of the pass-through investors (Rev Op Group) moved for an order in the bankruptcy court ruling that ML Manager could not act as agent for their interests, and that objecting investors like the Rev Op Group should not be obligated to pay any share of the exit financing loan. The bankruptcy court rejected both arguments in its "Clarification Order," issued on October 21, 2009. Rev Op Group appealed to the district court, which affirmed on January 31, 2012.

Relying on the confirmed plan, the Clarification Order and other decisions of the bankruptcy court, ML Manager began liquidating the loan portfolio. As liquidation proceeds became available, ML Manager filed an "Allocation Model" on September 1, 2010, to allocate costs and distribute the proceeds to investors. Rev Op Group objected to the model and the proposed distributions of funds, but the bankruptcy court provisionally overruled these objections. ML Manager filed a notice of its intent to distribute proceeds according to the allocation model and a motion to approve the distributions. R objected to the motion. On January 20, 2011, the bankruptcy court issued its "Distribution Order" overruling the objections and granting [**5]  ML Manager's motion to approve the distributions. Rev Op Group appealed to the district court, which affirmed the order on November 4, 2011.

Rev Op Group timely appealed from the district court's affirmances of the Clarification and Distribution Orders to this court.3  [*1214]  We have appellate jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d)(1).

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

771 F.3d 1211 *; 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 21441 **; 60 Bankr. Ct. Dec. 68; 2014 WL 5840462

IN THE MATTER OF: MORTGAGES LTD., Debtor, REV OP GROUP; STERNBERG ENTERPRISES PROFIT SHARING PLAN, Appellants, v. ML MANAGER LLC, Appellee. REV OP GROUP, Appellant, v. ML MANAGER LLC, Appellee.

Prior History:  [**1] Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. D.C. Nos. 2:09-cv-02698-RCJ, 2:08-bk-07465-RJH. D.C. No. 2:11-cv-00200-RCJ. Robert Clive Jones, District Judge, Presiding.

Disposition: APPEALS DISMISSED.

CORE TERMS

moot, appeals, bankruptcy court, equitably, orders, district court, distributions, third party, inequitable, investors, motion to dismiss, confirmation, proceeds, stays, bankruptcy judge, disagrees, rights

Civil Procedure, Appeals, Standards of Review, Clearly Erroneous Review, De Novo Review, Dismissal of Appeals, Involuntary Dismissals, Constitutional Law, Case or Controversy, Mootness, General Overview, Bankruptcy Law, Administrative Powers, Automatic Stay, Judicial Review, Procedural Matters, Judicial Review, Bankruptcy Appeals Procedures