Robert Joseph Ammirati Roseann Marie Ammirati v. Nellie Mae Incorporated the Educational Resource Institute

85 F.3d 615, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 31910, 1996 WL 241844
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMay 10, 1996
Docket95-2967
StatusUnpublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 85 F.3d 615 (Robert Joseph Ammirati Roseann Marie Ammirati v. Nellie Mae Incorporated the Educational Resource Institute) 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
Robert Joseph Ammirati Roseann Marie Ammirati v. Nellie Mae Incorporated the Educational Resource Institute, 85 F.3d 615, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 31910, 1996 WL 241844 (4th Cir. 1996).

Opinion

85 F.3d 615

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Robert Joseph AMMIRATI; Roseann Marie Ammirati, Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
NELLIE MAE INCORPORATED; THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCE
INSTITUTE, Defendants-Appellants.

No. 95-2967.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 9, 1996.
Decided: May 10, 1996.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (CA-95-337-4-22, BK-94-72609)

John Robert Lester, THE LESTER LAW FIRM, Columbia, SC, for Appellants. Robert Joseph Ammirati, Roseann Marie Ammirati, Appellees Pro Se.

D.S.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before MURNAGHAN and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Appellants appeal from the district court's order affirming the bankruptcy court's order that a portion of the education loans owed by Robert Ammirati is dischargeable in bankruptcy. 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. Ammirati v. Nellie Mae Inc., Nos. CA-95-337-4-22; BK-94-72609 (D.S.C. Oct. 11, 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

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

Related

Scholl v. NSLP (In Re Scholl)
259 B.R. 345 (N.D. Iowa, 2001)
Vermont Student Assistance Corp. v. Coulson (In Re Coulson)
253 B.R. 174 (W.D. North Carolina, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
85 F.3d 615, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 31910, 1996 WL 241844, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robert-joseph-ammirati-roseann-marie-ammirati-v-nellie-mae-incorporated-ca4-1996.