IN RE: THE ESTATE OF EDWARD L. LENK (2025)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

This is a consolidated appeal from, and original petition for extraordinary relief challenging, a district court order and judgment awarding attorney fees and declaring appellants/petitioners vexatious litigants. On February 14, 2025, this court issued an order directing the parties to address whether this matter was subject to an automatic stay stemming from appellants’/petitioners’ Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings. In their pro se response, appellants/petitioners “agree to ․ move the Bankruptcy Court for a leave from the Automatic Stay.” Respondents/real parties in interest did not respond to this court's order.

Given that appellants/petitioners concede that the automatic stay applies to this matter, it may linger indefinitely on this court's docket pending final resolution of the bankruptcy proceedings. Accordingly, judicial efficiency will best be served if the matter is dismissed without prejudice. Because such a dismissal does not require this court to reach the merits of the matter and is not inconsistent with the primary purposes of the bankruptcy stay, we conclude that the dismissal will not violate the bankruptcy stay.¹ See Indep. Union of Flight Attendants v. Pan Am. World Airways, Inc., 966 F.2d 457, 458-59 (9th Cir.. 1992) (holding that the automatic stay does not preclude dismissal of an appeal so long as dismissal is “consistent with the purpose of [11 U.S.C. § 362(a)]”); cf. Dean v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 72 F.3d 754, 755 (9th Cir. 1995) (holding that a post-bankruptcy petition dismissal will violate the automatic stay “where a decision to dismiss requires the court to first consider other issues presented by or related to the underlying case”).

We therefore dismiss this matter without prejudice to appellants’/petitioners’ right to move for reinstatement of the matter upon either the lifting of the bankruptcy stay or final resolution of the bankruptcy proceedings, if appellants/petitioners deem such a motion appropriate at the time.

It is so ORDERED.

Bulla, C.J.

Gibbons, J.

Westbrook, J.

FOOTNOTES

1.   The automatic stay provides a debtor “with protection against hungry creditors” and gives it a “breathing spell from its creditors” by stopping all collection efforts. Dean v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 72 F.3d 754, 755 (9th Cir. 1995) (internal quotation marks omitted). Further, it “assures creditors that the debtor's other creditors are not racing to various courthouses to pursue independent remedies to drain the debtor's assets.” Id. at 755-56.