Berardi v. Norwest Bank, Minnesota, NA (In re Goff Building, LLC)

Fourth Circuit

Berardi v. Norwest Bank, Minnesota, NA (In re Goff Building, LLC)

73 F. App'x 593

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedAugust 25, 2003

DocketNo. 03-1184

StatusPublished

This text of 73 F. App'x 593 (Berardi v. Norwest Bank, Minnesota, NA (In re Goff Building, LLC)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Berardi v. Norwest Bank, Minnesota, NA (In re Goff Building, LLC), 73 F. App'x 593 (4th Cir. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM.

Jerry A. Berardi and Betty J. Berardi appeal from the district court’s order affirming the bankruptcy court’s orders denying their motion to remand their case [594]*594back to the state court and denying their motion for leave to amend their complaint. We have reviewed the parties’ briefs, the joint appendix and supplement to the joint appendix, and the lower courts’ opinions and find no abuse of discretion and no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Berardi v. Norwest Bank Minn., NA, Nos. CA-2-50-1; BK-99-12207; AP-00-1195 (N.D.W Va. Jan. 23, 2003). 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.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM.

Jerry A. Berardi and Betty J. Berardi appeal from the district court’s order affirming the bankruptcy court’s orders denying their motion to remand their case [594]*594back to the state court and denying their motion for leave to amend their complaint. We have reviewed the parties’ briefs, the joint appendix and supplement to the joint appendix, and the lower courts’ opinions and find no abuse of discretion and no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Berardi v. Norwest Bank Minn., NA, Nos. CA-2-50-1; BK-99-12207; AP-00-1195 (N.D.W Va. Jan. 23, 2003). 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

73 F. App'x 593, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/berardi-v-norwest-bank-minnesota-na-in-re-goff-building-llc-ca4-2003.