Petito v. Washington Post Co.

Fourth Circuit

Petito v. Washington Post Co.

466 F. App'x 191

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided February 21, 2012·No. No. 11-1857·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Christopher Petito, Stephen Sieber, and Ronald Williams appeal from the district court’s order affirming the bankruptcy court’s order dismissing their complaint. We have reviewed the record on appeal and the informal briefs filed by the parties and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Petito v. The Washington Post Companies, No. 8:11-cv-01314-RWT (D.Md., July 8, 2011). We deny the motion to recuse the lower court judges and deny the motion to consolidate this appeal with Appeal No. 11-2208. 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

PER CURIAM:

Christopher Petito, Stephen Sieber, and Ronald Williams appeal from the district court’s order affirming the bankruptcy court’s order dismissing their complaint. We have reviewed the record on appeal and the informal briefs filed by the parties and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Petito v. The Washington Post Companies, No. 8:11-cv-01314-RWT (D.Md., July 8, 2011). We deny the motion to recuse the lower court judges and deny the motion to consolidate this appeal with Appeal No. 11-2208. 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.

Petito v. Washington Post Co., 466 F. App'x 191 (4th Cir. 2012).

Pincite

466 F. App'x 191 (Petito v. Washington Post Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.