Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Lisa Carlson v. Rushmore Loan Management, 14-1662 (2014)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 14-1662 Visitors: 2
Filed: Nov. 20, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1662 LISA BROOKS CARLSON, Debtor - Appellant, v. RUSHMORE LOAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC, Creditor – Appellee, R. CLINTON STACKHOUSE, JR., Trustee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Arenda L. Wright Allen, District Judge. (2:13-cv-00693-AWA-DEM) Submitted: November 18, 2014 Decided: November 20, 2014 Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. * Affirmed by unpublish
More
                              UNPUBLISHED

                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                      FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                              No. 14-1662


LISA BROOKS CARLSON,

                Debtor - Appellant,

          v.

RUSHMORE LOAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC,

                Creditor – Appellee,

R. CLINTON STACKHOUSE, JR.,

                Trustee.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk.      Arenda L. Wright Allen,
District Judge. (2:13-cv-00693-AWA-DEM)


Submitted:   November 18, 2014              Decided:   November 20, 2014


Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. *


Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.




     *
       The opinion is filed by a quorum of the panel pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 46(d) (2006).
Lisa Brooks Carlson, Appellant Pro Se. Ronald James Guillot,
Jr., SAMUEL I. WHITE, PC, Virginia Beach, Virginia, for
Appellee.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.




                                2
PER CURIAM:

            Lisa Carlson appeals from the district court’s order

affirming the bankruptcy court’s order granting relief from the

automatic    stay.      We     have   reviewed     the   record   and    find    no

reversible error.       Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated

by   the   district    court.      See   Carlson    v.    Rushmore     Loan   Mgmt.

Servs., LLC, No. 2:13-cv-00693-AWA-DEM (E.D. Va. June 4, 2014).

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