Scotchel v. Sheehan

585 F. App'x 187
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedNovember 14, 2014
DocketNo. 14-1301
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 585 F. App'x 187 (Scotchel v. Sheehan) 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
Scotchel v. Sheehan, 585 F. App'x 187 (4th Cir. 2014).

Opinion

[188]*188Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

John Charles Scotchel, Jr., appeals the district court’s order affirming the bankruptcy court’s order sustaining the trustee’s objection and finding that the entire amount of a contingency fee award was properly includable in Scotchel’s bankruptcy estate. We have reviewed the record included on appeal, as well as the parties’ briefs, and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the courts below. Scotchel v. Sheehan, Nos. 1:13-cv-00161-IMK; 1:12-bk-00009, 2014 WL 823379 (N.D.W.Va. Mar. 3, 2014; June 25, 2013). 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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
585 F. App'x 187, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/scotchel-v-sheehan-ca4-2014.