Megan Napier v. Karl Malloy

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: December 30, 2025
• Docket: 25-1932
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 25-1932 Doc: 14 Filed: 12/30/2025 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 25-1932

MEGAN NAPIER,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

KARL LINARD MALLOY,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. M. Hannah Lauck, Chief District Judge. (3:25-cv-00534-MHL)

Submitted: December 23, 2025 Decided: December 30, 2025

Before WILKINSON and RUSHING, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Karl Linard Malloy, Appellant Pro Se. Kevin A. Lake, MCDONALD, SUTTON & DUVAL, PLC, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 25-1932 Doc: 14 Filed: 12/30/2025 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

Karl Linard Malloy seeks to appeal the district court’s order affirming the

bankruptcy court’s order determining that Malloy’s attempt to remove to the bankruptcy

court a prepetition state court proceeding against Megan Napier was ineffective because

Malloy lacked standing to file a notice of removal. Napier has moved to dismiss the appeal,

asserting that Malloy lacks standing to pursue the appeal.

Upon review of the record and the parties’ arguments, we conclude that Malloy

lacks standing to pursue this appeal. See In re Richman, 104 F.3d 654, 657 (4th Cir. 1997)

(“Once appointed, the [Chapter 7] trustee becomes the estate’s proper party in interest, and

the only party with standing to appeal the bankruptcy court’s order.” (citation modified)).

Accordingly, we grant Napier’s motion to dismiss, and we dismiss the appeal. We dispense

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED