Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Yates v. District of Columbia, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    2 views2 pages
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case between Melvin Stanley Yates, II and the District of Columbia. The District Court affirmed the Bankruptcy Court's determination that the District of Columbia was not precluded from introducing evidence of fraudulent conduct by Yates in a civil action, even though it had previously voluntarily dismissed a claim of nondischargeability of debt based on fraud against Yates in his bankruptcy action. The Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court's ruling, finding no reversible error in the reasoning of the lower courts.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2005-07-27 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 04-2504

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case between Melvin Stanley Yates, II and the District of Columbia. The District Court affirmed the Bankruptcy Court's determination that the District of Columbia was not precluded from introducing evidence of fraudulent conduct by Yates in a civil action, even though it had previously voluntarily dismissed a claim of nondischargeability of debt based on fraud against Yates in his bankruptcy action. The Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court's ruling, finding no reversible error in the reasoning of the lower courts.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    2 views2 pages

    Yates v. District of Columbia, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case between Melvin Stanley Yates, II and the District of Columbia. The District Court affirmed the Bankruptcy Court's determination that the District of Columbia was not precluded from introducing evidence of fraudulent conduct by Yates in a civil action, even though it had previously voluntarily dismissed a claim of nondischargeability of debt based on fraud against Yates in his bankruptcy action. The Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court's ruling, finding no reversible error in the reasoning of the lower courts.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 04-2504

    MELVIN STANLEY YATES, II,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,
    Defendant - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, District Judge. (CA-042845-8-RWT; BK-03-13176; AP-03-1244; AP-03-1218)

    Submitted:

    June 30, 2005

    Decided:

    July 27, 2005

    Before GREGORY and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Charles E. Wagner, Silver Spring, Maryland, for Appellant. Robert


    J. Spagnoletti, Attorney General, Edward E. Schwab, Deputy Attorney
    General, James C. McKay, Jr., Senior Assistant Attorney General,
    Washington, D.C., for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Melvin Stanley Yates, II, appeals from the district
    courts order affirming the determination by the bankruptcy court
    that the District of Columbia was not precluded from introducing
    evidence of fraudulent conduct by Yates in its civil action to
    enforce the Consumer Protection Procedures Act, D.C. Code Ann.
    28-3904, 3909 (2001), against Yates after it had voluntarily
    dismissed with prejudice its claim that any debt in its favor
    against

    Yates

    bankruptcy

    based

    action.

    on

    fraud

    We

    have

    was

    nondischargeable

    reviewed

    the

    briefs,

    in
    the

    Yates
    joint

    appendix, and the bankruptcy court and district court orders and
    find no reversible error.
    of the district court.

    Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning


    See Yates v. District of Columbia, No.

    CA-04-2845-8-RWT (D. Md. filed Nov. 10, 2004; entered Nov. 12,
    2004).

    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 -

    You might also like