Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Keane v. Keane, 03-2187 (2004)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 03-2187 Visitors: 34
Filed: Feb. 24, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-2187 ELIZABETH W. KEANE, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus DANIEL ALFRED KEANE, Debtor - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge. (CA-03-474) Submitted: February 19, 2004 Decided: February 24, 2004 Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Daniel Alfred Keane, Appellant Pro Se
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-2187 ELIZABETH W. KEANE, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus DANIEL ALFRED KEANE, Debtor - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge. (CA-03-474) Submitted: February 19, 2004 Decided: February 24, 2004 Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Daniel Alfred Keane, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Bruce Brown, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Daniel A. Keane appeals from the district court’s order affirming the bankruptcy court’s order denying his motion for sanctions, granting Elizabeth Keane’s motion for relief from the automatic stay, and allowing Elizabeth Keane to file an adversary proceeding objecting to his discharge. Our review of the record and the district court’s opinion discloses no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Keane v. Keane, No. CA-03-474 (E.D. Va. Aug. 18, 2003). Daniel Keane’s motion to strike Elizabeth Keane’s appeal brief is denied. 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