Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

In re: Storch v., 05-1478 (2006)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 05-1478 Visitors: 12
Filed: Jun. 26, 2006
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-1478 In Re: JILL CHARLENE STORCH, Debtor. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - JILL CHARLENE STORCH, Debtor - Appellant, versus DEUTSCH BANK NATIONAL COMPANY, formerly known as Bankers Trust Company of California, Creditor - Appellee, and ELLEN W. COSBY, Trustee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, District Judge. (CA- 05-107-1-JFM; BK-04-26509-1) Submitted: J
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-1478 In Re: JILL CHARLENE STORCH, Debtor. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - JILL CHARLENE STORCH, Debtor - Appellant, versus DEUTSCH BANK NATIONAL COMPANY, formerly known as Bankers Trust Company of California, Creditor - Appellee, and ELLEN W. COSBY, Trustee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, District Judge. (CA- 05-107-1-JFM; BK-04-26509-1) Submitted: June 22, 2006 Decided: June 26, 2006 Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jill Charlene Storch, Appellant Pro Se. James Edward Clarke, DRAPER & GOLDBERG, PLLC, Leesburg, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). - 2 - PER CURIAM: Jill Charlene Storch appeals the district court’s order affirming the bankruptcy court’s order denying her motion for reconsideration of the order annulling the automatic stay with respect to the property located at 8524 Willow Oak Road, Baltimore, Maryland. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. In re: Storch, Nos. CA-05-107-1-JFM; BK-04-26509-1 (D. Md. Apr. 12, 2005). 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 - 3 -
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