Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Hendricks v. Bair, 01-2006 (2004)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-2006 Visitors: 31
Filed: May 12, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-2006 In Re: CARL C. HENDRICKS, JR., Debtor. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CARL C. HENDRICKS, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CAROLYN BAIR, Defendant - Appellee, and KEVIN CAMPBELL, Trustee. No. 02-2298 In Re: CARL C. HENDRICKS, JR., Debtor. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CARL C. HENDRICKS, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CAROLYN BAIR, Defendant - Appellee, and KEVIN CAMPBELL, Trustee. Appeals from the United Sta
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-2006 In Re: CARL C. HENDRICKS, JR., Debtor. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CARL C. HENDRICKS, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CAROLYN BAIR, Defendant - Appellee, and KEVIN CAMPBELL, Trustee. No. 02-2298 In Re: CARL C. HENDRICKS, JR., Debtor. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CARL C. HENDRICKS, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CAROLYN BAIR, Defendant - Appellee, and KEVIN CAMPBELL, Trustee. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. David C. Norton, District Judge. (CA-00-3135-2-18; BK-99-80230) Submitted: March 26, 2004 Decided: May 12, 2004 Before WIDENER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Carl C. Hendricks, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Robert E. Austin, Jr., ROBERT E. AUSTIN, JR., P.A., Leesburg, Florida; Michael Conrady, CAMPBELL LAW FIRM, Mount Pleasant, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). - 2 - PER CURIAM: In No. 01-2006, Carl C. Hendricks, Jr., appeals from the district court’s order which dismissed as untimely his appeal from the bankruptcy court’s consent order entered May 12, 2002, and denied his motion to conduct further discovery during the pendency of his appeal. In No. 02-2298, Hendricks appeals from the magistrate judge’s order enforcing a settlement entered into between the parties in open court.* We have reviewed the record and found no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court and magistrate judge. Hendricks v. Bair, Nos. CA-00-3135-2-18; BK-99-80230 (D.S.C. July 31, 2002; Oct. 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 * The parties consented to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2000). - 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