In re D.C. Diamond Corp.

Fourth Circuit

In re D.C. Diamond Corp.

687 F. App'x 261

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedApril 27, 2017

DocketNo. 16-2362

StatusPublished

This text of 687 F. App'x 261 (In re D.C. Diamond Corp.) 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

In re D.C. Diamond Corp., 687 F. App'x 261 (4th Cir. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Tomislav Milic appeals from the district court’s order dismissing his appeal from the bankruptcy court’s order denying his motion for an expedited hearing on his objection to a sale that was previously approved by the bankruptcy court. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the courts below. Milic v. McCarthy, Nos. 1:16-cv-01076-TSE-IDD, 12-16730-BFK (E.D. Va. filed Oct. 27, 2016; entered Oct. 28, 2016). We 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.

AFFIRMED

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

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Tomislav Milic appeals from the district court’s order dismissing his appeal from the bankruptcy court’s order denying his motion for an expedited hearing on his objection to a sale that was previously approved by the bankruptcy court. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the courts below. Milic v. McCarthy, Nos. 1:16-cv-01076-TSE-IDD, 12-16730-BFK (E.D. Va. filed Oct. 27, 2016; entered Oct. 28, 2016). We 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.

AFFIRMED

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

687 F. App'x 261, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-dc-diamond-corp-ca4-2017.