Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Fortescue v. Hillier, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    8 views2 pages
    William Fortescue appealed a bankruptcy court ruling to the district court. The district court dismissed Fortescue's appeal and denied his motion for reconsideration, finding no reversible error. The appeals court affirmed the district court's rulings, agreeing that there was no error in the lower court's dismissal of the bankruptcy appeal or denial of the reconsideration motion. The appeals court ruled without needing oral arguments, as the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1996-08-02 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 95-2722

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    William Fortescue appealed a bankruptcy court ruling to the district court. The district court dismissed Fortescue's appeal and denied his motion for reconsideration, finding no reversible error. The appeals court affirmed the district court's rulings, agreeing that there was no error in the lower court's dismissal of the bankruptcy appeal or denial of the reconsideration motion. The appeals court ruled without needing oral arguments, as the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    Fortescue v. Hillier, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    William Fortescue appealed a bankruptcy court ruling to the district court. The district court dismissed Fortescue's appeal and denied his motion for reconsideration, finding no reversible error. The appeals court affirmed the district court's rulings, agreeing that there was no error in the lower court's dismissal of the bankruptcy appeal or denial of the reconsideration motion. The appeals court ruled without needing oral arguments, as the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the case materials.

    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    UNPUBLISHED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. 95-2722

    WILLIAM NICHOLAS FORTESCUE, JR.,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    DAVID R. HILLIER, Trustee; JERRY E. KING,
    Court-appointed Auctioneer; ROBERT CAMILLE;
    HISTORIC FLAT ROCK; W.R. TABER; SIDNEY
    KIRKLEY; LINDA OSTEEN BENTLEY; HARLEY OSTEEN;
    HARVEY SPIEGEL; GREGORY P. JUSTUS; HILDA
    CAMILLE; BRENDA B. BRYSON; CLIFFORD SHIPMAN;
    DELORES J. SHIPMAN; ROSCOE GREEN; NANCY GREEN;
    TOM LONG; CHRISTINA LONG; CHARLES T. LARUS,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Richard L. Voorhees, Chief
    District Judge. (CA-95-65, BK-93-10347)
    Submitted:

    January 30, 1996

    Decided:

    August 2, 1996

    Before WILKINSON, Chief Judge, MOTZ, Circuit Judge, and CHAPMAN,


    Senior Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    William Nicholas Fortescue, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. David G. Gray,
    Jr., WESTALL, GRAY, KIMEL & CONNOLLY, Asheville, North Carolina;
    Robert Keith Johnson, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant appeals from the district court's orders dismissing
    his bankruptcy appeal and denying his motion for reconsideration.
    We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and
    find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning
    of the district court. Fortescue v. Hillier, Nos. CA-95-65; BK-9310347 (W.D.N.C. Apr. 18 & Aug. 22, 1995). 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

    You might also like