Filed: May 04, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 99-11341 Summary Calendar In the Matter of: LARRY CLIFTON BROOKS, Debtor. LARRY CLIFTON BROOKS, Appellant, versus MOSELEY & STANDERFER PC, Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas 1:99-CV-161 May 3, 2000 Before POLITZ, SMITH, and WIENER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Larry Clifton Brooks appeals an adverse judgment affirming the action of the Bankruptcy Court on his claim of a homestead exemp
Summary: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 99-11341 Summary Calendar In the Matter of: LARRY CLIFTON BROOKS, Debtor. LARRY CLIFTON BROOKS, Appellant, versus MOSELEY & STANDERFER PC, Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas 1:99-CV-161 May 3, 2000 Before POLITZ, SMITH, and WIENER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Larry Clifton Brooks appeals an adverse judgment affirming the action of the Bankruptcy Court on his claim of a homestead exempt..
More
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 99-11341 Summary Calendar In the Matter of: LARRY CLIFTON BROOKS, Debtor. LARRY CLIFTON BROOKS, Appellant, versus MOSELEY & STANDERFER PC, Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas 1:99-CV-161 May 3, 2000 Before POLITZ, SMITH, and WIENER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Larry Clifton Brooks appeals an adverse judgment affirming the action of the Bankruptcy Court on his claim of a homestead exemption on 137 acres of real property in Irion County, Texas. Our review of the record, briefs of the parties, and applicable law persuades that there has been no error in the rulings of the courts à quo. Accordingly, on the basis of the facts as found, authorities cited, and analysis made by the District Court in its careful and scholarly Order herein, signed and filed on October 20, 1999, the judgment appealed is AFFIRMED. * Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
