Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Boury, Incorporated v. Ormet, 02-2125 (2003)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 02-2125 Visitors: 10
Filed: Mar. 25, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-2125 In Re: BOURY, INCORPORATED, Debtor. ORMET CORPORATION, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus GEORGE BOURY; MICHAEL BOURY; NANCY E. BOURY; PEARL W. BOURY; BOURY, INCORPORATED; 808 CORPORATION; TJR, INCORPORATED; BOURY ENTERPRISES; BOURY ENTERPRISES, INCORPORATED, Defendants - Appellants, and WHEELING INN, INCORPORATED, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Wheeling
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-2125 In Re: BOURY, INCORPORATED, Debtor. ORMET CORPORATION, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus GEORGE BOURY; MICHAEL BOURY; NANCY E. BOURY; PEARL W. BOURY; BOURY, INCORPORATED; 808 CORPORATION; TJR, INCORPORATED; BOURY ENTERPRISES; BOURY ENTERPRISES, INCORPORATED, Defendants - Appellants, and WHEELING INN, INCORPORATED, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., District Judge. (CA-01-134-5, BK-01-51663, AP-01-5175) Submitted: March 20, 2003 Decided: March 25, 2003 Before WILLIAMS and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. David Wyant, BAILEY & WYANT, Wheeling, West Virginia; Richard T. Ricketts, RICKETTS, CO., L.P.A., Columbus, Ohio; Ray Byrd, SCHRADER BYRD, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellants. Kimberly Luff Wakim, Robert L. Burns, Jr., THORP, REED & ARMSTRONG, L.L.P., Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellants appeal from the district court’s order affirming the bankruptcy court’s order granting Appellee relief from the automatic stay to pursue a state court action. We have reviewed the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Boury, Inc. v. Ormet, Nos. CA-01-134-5, BK-01-51663, AP- 01-5175 (N.D.W. Va. Aug. 23, 2002). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer