Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Coleman v. Simpson, 01-1465 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-1465 Visitors: 53
Filed: Aug. 29, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 01, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1465 In Re: COLEMAN CRATEN, LLC; MONICA LYNN COLEMAN, Debtors. MONICA LYNN COLEMAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LORI S. SIMPSON, Chapter 7 Trustee, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Marvin J. Garbis, District Judge. (CA-01- 644-MJG, BK-99-56381, AP-99-56239-SD) Submitted: August 23, 2001 Decided: August 29, 2001 Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit J
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1465 In Re: COLEMAN CRATEN, LLC; MONICA LYNN COLEMAN, Debtors. MONICA LYNN COLEMAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LORI S. SIMPSON, Chapter 7 Trustee, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Marvin J. Garbis, District Judge. (CA-01- 644-MJG, BK-99-56381, AP-99-56239-SD) Submitted: August 23, 2001 Decided: August 29, 2001 Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Monica Lynn Coleman, Appellant Pro Se. Kevin Gerald Hroblak, WHITEFORD, TAYLOR & PRESTON, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Monica Coleman appeals from the district court’s order dis- missing as interlocutory her appeal from the bankruptcy court’s order granting Bankruptcy Rule 2004 examinations of certain third- parties. Our review of the record and the district court’s opinion discloses no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the rea- soning of the district court. Coleman v. Simpson, Nos. CA-01-644- MJG; BK-99-56381; AP-99-56239-SD (D. Md. Mar. 22, 2001). 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