Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Babb v. Angell, 11-1122 (2011)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 11-1122 Visitors: 9
Filed: Apr. 15, 2011
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-1122 In Re: MALCOLM MCFALL BABB, Debtor. - MALCOLM MCFALL BABB, Debtor – Appellant, v. JAMES B. ANGELL, Trustee – Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Greenville. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior District Judge. (7:09-mc-00011-MJH; 06-03003-8-JRL) Submitted: April 5, 2011 Decided: April 15, 2011 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublish
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-1122 In Re: MALCOLM MCFALL BABB, Debtor. --------------------------- MALCOLM MCFALL BABB, Debtor – Appellant, v. JAMES B. ANGELL, Trustee – Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Greenville. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior District Judge. (7:09-mc-00011-MJH; 06-03003-8-JRL) Submitted: April 5, 2011 Decided: April 15, 2011 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Malcolm McFall Babb, Appellant Pro Se. James Bigelow Angell, HOWARD, STALLINGS, FROM & HUTSON, PA, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Malcolm McFall Babb appeals from the district court’s orders dismissing his appeal from the bankruptcy court’s order approving a compromise agreement and denying his motion for reconsideration of that order. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error in the district court’s determination that Babb lacked standing to appeal from the bankruptcy court’s order. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. In re Babb, Nos. 7:09-mc-00011-MJH; 06-03003-8- JRL (E.D.N.C. July 12, 2010 & Jan. 12, 2011). We deny as moot Babb’s motion for a stay of the bankruptcy court’s order pending appeal. 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