Prime Healthcare Services, LLC v. Brotman Medical Center, Inc.

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUL 13 2011 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT In the Matter of: BROTMAN MEDICAL No. 09-56907 CENTER, INC., D.C. No. 2:09-cv-02378-CJC Debtor, MEMORANDUM* PRIME HEALTHCARE SERVICES, LLC, Appellant, v. BROTMAN MEDICAL CENTER, INC., Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Cormac J. Carney, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted June 9, 2011 Pasadena, California * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. Before: B. FLETCHER and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges, and BREWSTER, Senior District Judge.** We affirm the judgment of the district court that Prime Healthcare Services, LLC’s appeal of the confirmation order is equitably moot. Here, the substantial consummation of the reorganization plan is a “comprehensive change of circumstances” which makes granting the relief sought inequitable. See Focus Media v. Nat’l Broadcasting Co., 378 F.3d 916, 923 (9th Cir. 2004). Requiring Brotman Medical Center, Inc. to pay Prime Healthcare an additional sum of money would unjustly affect the rights of other creditors and investors, particularly Brotman’s shareholders, whose equity interests would be placed below Prime Healthcare’s claim. Because allowing Prime Healthcare to contest the now- consummated reorganization plan “would knock the props out from under the authorization for every transaction that has taken place,” In re Roberts Farms, Inc., 652 F.2d 793, 797 (9th Cir. 1981), we affirm.1 AFFIRMED. ** The Honorable Rudi M. Brewster, Senior District Judge for the U.S. District Court for Southern California, San Diego, sitting by designation. 1 Brotman’s unopposed Motion for Judicial Notice is granted.