South Carolina Nat. Bank v. Stone

Fourth Circuit

South Carolina Nat. Bank v. Stone

16 F.3d 411, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 7313, 1994 WL 34766

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 3, 1994

Docket93-1835

StatusPublished

This text of 16 F.3d 411 (South Carolina Nat. Bank v. Stone) 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

South Carolina Nat. Bank v. Stone, 16 F.3d 411, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 7313, 1994 WL 34766 (4th Cir. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

16 F.3d 411
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

SOUTH CAROLINA NATIONAL BANK; Gordon K. Billipp; Elizabeth
W. Billip, Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
C. Donald STONE, Defendant-Appellant,
and
James A. STONE; Buchanan & Company; Unico Development SE;
United Medical & Surgical Supply Corporation; C. Benjamin
Smith; Ann H. Smith; Benan; Retirement Horizons; Tom L.
Sizemore; John J. Bandy; Kenny O. Merritt; Rickey
Merritt; Horace C. Smith; J.W. Wakefield; Harold Fleming;
Heritage Living Centers, Incorporated; J R. Randall;
Parker & Kotouc; Thomas O. Kotouc; Low & Furby;
Whiteside, Smith, Jones & Duncan; May Zima & Company, Defendants.

No. 93-1835.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Jan. 20, 1994.
Decided Feb. 3, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg. William B. Traxler, Jr., District Judge. (CA-88-791-7-21)

C. Donald Stone, appellant pro se.

William Llewellyn Pope, Pope & Rodgers, Columbia, SC; Thomas Allen Hutcheson, Nelson, Mullins, Riley & Scarborough, Charleston, SC, for appellees.

D.S.C.

DISMISSED.

Before WIDENER, WILKINS, and HAMILTON,* Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying, without prejudice, Appellant's application for in forma pauperis status. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis* and dismiss this appeal on the reasoning of the district court. South Carolina National Bank v. Stone, No. CA-88-791-7-21 (D.S.C. June 11, 1993). 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.

*

Judge Hamilton recused himself from consideration of this appeal. The decision is filed by a quorum of the panel. 28 U.S.C. Sec. 46(d)

*

Our separate denial of leave to proceed in forma pauperis is also without prejudice to future such applications

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

16 F.3d 411
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 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.

SOUTH CAROLINA NATIONAL BANK; Gordon K. Billipp; Elizabeth
W. Billip, Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
C. Donald STONE, Defendant-Appellant,
and
James A. STONE; Buchanan & Company; Unico Development SE;
United Medical & Surgical Supply Corporation; C. Benjamin
Smith; Ann H. Smith; Benan; Retirement Horizons; Tom L.
Sizemore; John J. Bandy; Kenny O. Merritt; Rickey
Merritt; Horace C. Smith; J.W. Wakefield; Harold Fleming;
Heritage Living Centers, Incorporated; J R. Randall;
Parker & Kotouc; Thomas O. Kotouc; Low & Furby;
Whiteside, Smith, Jones & Duncan; May Zima & Company, Defendants.

No. 93-1835.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Jan. 20, 1994.
Decided Feb. 3, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg. William B. Traxler, Jr., District Judge. (CA-88-791-7-21)

C. Donald Stone, appellant pro se.

William Llewellyn Pope, Pope & Rodgers, Columbia, SC; Thomas Allen Hutcheson, Nelson, Mullins, Riley & Scarborough, Charleston, SC, for appellees.

D.S.C.

DISMISSED.

Before WIDENER, WILKINS, and HAMILTON,* Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying, without prejudice, Appellant's application for in forma pauperis status. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis* and dismiss this appeal on the reasoning of the district court. South Carolina National Bank v. Stone, No. CA-88-791-7-21 (D.S.C. June 11, 1993). 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.

*

Judge Hamilton recused himself from consideration of this appeal. The decision is filed by a quorum of the panel. 28 U.S.C. Sec. 46(d)

*

Our separate denial of leave to proceed in forma pauperis is also without prejudice to future such applications

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

16 F.3d 411, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 7313, 1994 WL 34766, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/south-carolina-nat-bank-v-stone-ca4-1994.