agreement because this additional standard merely increased the burden on the Trustee to show that the settlement agreement was fair and reasonable. See In re A & C Props., 784 F.2d. at 1381; see also In re Woodson, 839 F.2d at 620. AFFIRMED. ** This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. 1 . We decline to consider Appellants' argument that an evidentiary hearing was required in connection with the compromise agreement. Appellants failed to raise the issue before the bankruptcy court and, in any event, proffered no evidence at the compromise agreement hearing notwithstanding notice that "testimony may be received.” See Jonas v. U.S. Small Bus. Admin. (In re South-land Supply, Inc.), 657 F.2d 1076, 1079 (9th Cir.1981)
holding that this court need not entertain an objection raised for the first time on appeal unless it is necessary to prevent manifest injustice holding that an issue not raised in the trial court cannot be raised for the first time on appeal holding that because a claim was never raised in the district court this court would not consider it for the first time on appeal holding that an issue raised for the first time on appeal will not be considered by this court holding that this court need not address the merits of an argument raised for the first time on appeal