Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Jacqueline Shaver v. Bank of America, N.A., 14-2257 (2015)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 14-2257 Visitors: 4
Filed: Aug. 05, 2015
Latest Update: Apr. 11, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-2257 In Re: JACQUELINE RHEA SHAVER, Debtor. - MARTIN P. SHEEHAN, Chapter 7 Trustee, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. John Preston Bailey, District Judge. (1:14-cv-00125-JPB; 1:10-bk-00813) Submitted: July 28, 2015 Decided: August 5, 2015 Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-2257 In Re: JACQUELINE RHEA SHAVER, Debtor. -------------------------------- MARTIN P. SHEEHAN, Chapter 7 Trustee, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. John Preston Bailey, District Judge. (1:14-cv-00125-JPB; 1:10-bk-00813) Submitted: July 28, 2015 Decided: August 5, 2015 Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Martin P. Sheehan, SHEEHAN & NUGENT, PLLC, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellant. Monica E. Webb, MCGUIREWOODS, LLP, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Martin P. Sheehan, the trustee in the underlying bankruptcy proceeding, appeals from the district court’s order affirming the bankruptcy court’s order: (1) granting summary judgment in favor of Bank of America, N.A., and (2) denying his request to certify a question to the West Virginia Supreme Court. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. In re: Shaver (Sheehan v. Bank of America, N.A.), No. 1:14-cv-00125-JPB (N.D. W. Va. Oct. 24, 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 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