Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Sycamore Grove Homeowners Ass'n v. Moorish Holy Temple of Science, 13-1467 (2013)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 13-1467 Visitors: 40
Filed: Sep. 26, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1467 SYCAMORE GROVE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INCORPORATED, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MOORISH HOLY TEMPLE OF SCIENCE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, Chief District Judge. (3:13-cv-00025-FDW-DCK) Submitted: September 24, 2013 Decided: September 26, 2013 Before NIEMEYER and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senio
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1467 SYCAMORE GROVE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INCORPORATED, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MOORISH HOLY TEMPLE OF SCIENCE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, Chief District Judge. (3:13-cv-00025-FDW-DCK) Submitted: September 24, 2013 Decided: September 26, 2013 Before NIEMEYER and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Moorish Holy Temple of Science, Appellant. John Watson Bowers, HORACK TALLEY PHARR & LOWNDES, PA, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Dianne Michele Carter El-Bay, the self-proclaimed administrator/trustee of Moorish Holy Temple of Science, seeks to appeal the district court’s orders dismissing her notice of removal of the underlying state foreclosure action, and denying reconsideration. Carter El-Bay has failed to demonstrate that she is authorized to litigate on behalf of Moorish Holy Temple. Accordingly, we deny her motion to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss this appeal. 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. DISMISSED 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