Rose v. Bargeski

Filing 920070730


Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-1480 CHERYL E. ROSE, Trustee, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ALBERT M. BARGESKI, Defendant - Appellee, and AUDREY YVONNE BARGESKI, Debtor - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, District Judge. (8:05-cv00962-RWT; 8:05-cv-01410-RWT; BK-04-01432) Submitted: June 27, 2007 Decided: July 30, 2007 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James M. Hoffman, John D. Sadler, SHULMAN, ROGERS, GANDAL, PORDY & ECKER, P.A., Rockville, Maryland, for Appellant. Laura J. Margulies, LAURA MARGULIES & ASSOCIATES, Rockville, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Cheryl E. Rose, the trustee in the underlying bankruptcy proceeding, appeals from the district court's order affirming the bankruptcy court's order finding that a conveyance of certain real property was an avoidable post-petition transfer under 11 U.S.C. 549 (2000), but reducing the amount of the bankruptcy court's judgment in her favor from $68,929.18 to $22,080.05. We have reviewed the record, including the opinions of the courts below, as well as the Trustee's brief and we find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's decision for the reasons stated in its opinion affirming as modified the bankruptcy court's order. cv-00962-RWT; 2006). Rose v. Bargeski (In re Bargeski); Case Nos. 8:058:05-cv-01410-RWT; BK-04-01432 (D. Md. Mar. 31, 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 - 2 -

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?