Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Kenneth D. Bell v. Li Yu Chen, 18-1084 (2018)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 18-1084 Visitors: 42
Filed: Jul. 23, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1084 KENNETH D. BELL, in his capacity as court-appointed Receiver for Rex Venture Group, LLC d/b/a ZeekRewards.com, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. LI YU CHEN, Appellant, and TODD DISNER; TRUDY GILMOND; TRUDY GILMOND, LLC; JERRY NAPIER; DARREN MILLER; RHONDA GATES; DAVID SORRELLS; INNOVATION MARKETING LLC; AARON ANDREWS; SHARA ANDREWS; GLOBAL INTERNET FORMULA, INC.; T. LEMONT SILVER; KAREN SILVER; MICHAEL VAN LEEUWEN; DURANT BROCK
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1084 KENNETH D. BELL, in his capacity as court-appointed Receiver for Rex Venture Group, LLC d/b/a ZeekRewards.com, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. LI YU CHEN, Appellant, and TODD DISNER; TRUDY GILMOND; TRUDY GILMOND, LLC; JERRY NAPIER; DARREN MILLER; RHONDA GATES; DAVID SORRELLS; INNOVATION MARKETING LLC; AARON ANDREWS; SHARA ANDREWS; GLOBAL INTERNET FORMULA, INC.; T. LEMONT SILVER; KAREN SILVER; MICHAEL VAN LEEUWEN; DURANT BROCKETT; DAVID KETTNER; MARY KETTNER; P.A.W.S. CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LLC; LORI JEAN WEBER; A DEFENDANT CLASS OF NET WINNERS IN ZEEKREWARDS.COM; DEFENDANT CLASS, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Senior District Judge. (3:14-cv-00091-GCM) Submitted: July 19, 2018 Decided: July 23, 2018 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Li Yu Chen, Appellant Pro Se. Kenneth D. Bell, Irving Michael Brenner, MCGUIREWOOD, LLP, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Li Yu Chen appeals the district court’s order granting Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and ordering that Chen return profits derived from a Ponzi scheme. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant Chen’s application to proceed in forma pauperis, but affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Bell v. Chen, No. 3:14-cv-00091-GCM (W.D.N.C. Nov. 29, 2016). 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. 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