Jonathan Loy v. Jeremiah O'Sullivan
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999067679-2] in 13-1358 Originating case number: 4:12-cv-00091-RAJ-LRL,09-51379-FJS,09-05034,07-51040-FJS Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999167927].. [13-1237, 13-1247, 13-1248, 13-1358]
Jonathan Loy v. Jeremiah O'Sullivan
Appeal: 13-1237
Doc: 17
Filed: 08/07/2013
Pg: 1 of 5
Doc. 0
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-1237
In Re: JONATHAN A. LOY,
Debtor.
---------------------JONATHAN A. LOY,
Debtor – Appellant,
v.
JEREMIAH ANTHONY O’SULLIVAN, as Trustee and Receiver for the
bankrupt Jonathan A. Loy,
Trustee – Appellee,
and
W. CLARKSON MCDOW, JR., U.S. Trustee,
Trustee.
No. 13-1247
In Re: JONATHAN A. LOY,
Debtor.
---------------------JONATHAN A. LOY,
Debtor – Appellant,
Dockets.Justia.com
Appeal: 13-1237
Doc: 17
Filed: 08/07/2013
Pg: 2 of 5
v.
JEREMIAH ANTHONY O’SULLIVAN, as Trustee and Receiver for the
bankrupt Jonathan A. Loy,
Trustee – Appellee,
and
W. CLARKSON MCDOW, JR., U.S. Trustee,
Trustee.
No. 13-1248
In Re: JONATHAN A. LOY,
Debtor.
---------------------JONATHAN A. LOY,
Debtor – Appellant,
v.
JEREMIAH ANTHONY O’SULLIVAN, as Trustee and Receiver for the
bankrupt Jonathan A. Loy; U.S. TRUSTEE,
Trustees - Appellees.
No. 13-1358
In Re: JONATHAN A. LOY,
Debtor.
----------------------
2
Appeal: 13-1237
Doc: 17
Filed: 08/07/2013
Pg: 3 of 5
JEREMIAH ANTHONY O’SULLIVAN, as Trustee and Receiver for the
Bankrupt Jonathan A. Loy,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
JONATHAN A. LOY,
Defendant – Appellant,
and
SUSAN J. LOY; JOSEPH L. R. PINARD; LEO JON PERK; TOM C.
SMITH, JR.
Defendants.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Newport News.
Raymond A. Jackson,
District Judge.
(4:12-cv-00091-RAJ-LRL; 4:12-cv-00090-RAJ-DEM;
4:12-cv-00115-RAJ-TEM; 4:12-cv-00151-RAJ-TEM; 09-51379-FJS; 0905034-FJS)
Submitted:
July 31, 2013
Decided:
August 7, 2013
Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jonathan A. Loy, Appellant Pro Se.
James Robertson Clarke,
MCGUIREWOODS, LLP, Norfolk, Virginia; Douglas Michael Foley,
MCGUIREWOODS, LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
3
Appeal: 13-1237
Doc: 17
Filed: 08/07/2013
Pg: 4 of 5
PER CURIAM:
In Nos. 13-1237 and 13-1247, Jonathan Loy appeals the
district court’s orders affirming the bankruptcy court’s orders
denying his motion to revoke recognition of a foreign bankruptcy
proceeding, 11 U.S.C. § 1517(d) (2006).
In No. 13-1248, Loy
appeals the district court’s order dismissing his appeal from
the bankruptcy court’s order denying his motion to dismiss the
underlying Chapter 7 proceeding.
Appeal No. 13-1358 is Loy’s
appeal from the district court’s order adopting the bankruptcy
court’s report and recommendation to grant summary judgment in
favor
of
Jeremiah
bankruptcy
judgment
O’Sullivan,
proceeding,
that
two
on
the
his
transfers
of
trustee
in
Loy’s
claim
seeking
a
real
property
were
English
declaratory
void
ab
initio, and striking Susan Loy’s affirmative defense in which
she attempted to assert an ownership interest in the property.
We have thoroughly reviewed the record on appeal as well as the
parties’ briefs and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we
grant Loy’s motions to proceed in forma pauperis and affirm all
appeals
on
O’Sullivan,
the
reasoning
of
the
courts
Nos.
4:12-cv-00091-RAJ-LRL;
below.
Loy
v.
4:12-cv-00090-RAJ-DEM;
4:12-cv-00115-RAJ-TEM; 4:12-cv-00151-RAJ-TEM (E.D. Va. Jan. 22,
2013; Feb. 12, 2013).
We dispense with oral argument because
the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
4
Appeal: 13-1237
Doc: 17
materials
before
Filed: 08/07/2013
this
court
Pg: 5 of 5
and
argument
would
not
aid
the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED
5
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?