Forti v. Ross

Fourth Circuit

Forti v. Ross

518 F. App'x 221

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedApril 22, 2013

DocketNo. 12-2383

StatusPublished

This text of 518 F. App'x 221 (Forti v. Ross) 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

Forti v. Ross, 518 F. App'x 221 (4th Cir. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Carol A. Forti appeals from the district court’s order denying her motion for a stay of the disbursement of funds in her bankruptcy case pending appeal. All funds of the bankruptcy estate have now been distributed and a discharge granted. Accordingly, this appeal is moot. See In re Stadium Mgt. Corp., 895 F.2d 845, 847 (1st Cir.1990) (“Absent a stay, the court must dismiss a pending appeal as moot because the court has no remedy that it can fashion even if it would have determined the issues differently”). We deny Forti’s pending motions and 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.

DISMISSED.

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

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Carol A. Forti appeals from the district court’s order denying her motion for a stay of the disbursement of funds in her bankruptcy case pending appeal. All funds of the bankruptcy estate have now been distributed and a discharge granted. Accordingly, this appeal is moot. See In re Stadium Mgt. Corp., 895 F.2d 845, 847 (1st Cir.1990) (“Absent a stay, the court must dismiss a pending appeal as moot because the court has no remedy that it can fashion even if it would have determined the issues differently”). We deny Forti’s pending motions and 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.

DISMISSED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

518 F. App'x 221, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/forti-v-ross-ca4-2013.