Richard Meabon v. R. Johnson


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:15-cv-00398-RJC,10-30455,12-03218 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000163222].. [16-1780]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-1780 Doc: 41 Filed: 09/28/2017 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-1780 In re: RICHARD P. MEABON; EVELYN L. MEABON -----------------------------RICHARD P. MEABON, Debtor – Appellant, v. R. KEITH JOHNSON, Trustee – Appellee, and EVELYN L. MEABON, Debtor. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert J. Conrad, Jr., District Judge. (3:15-cv-00398-RJC; 10-30455; 1203218) Submitted: September 7, 2017 Before SHEDD, AGEE, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Decided: September 28, 2017 Appeal: 16-1780 Doc: 41 Filed: 09/28/2017 Pg: 2 of 3 Kurt Friedrich Hausler, HAUSLER LAW FIRM, PLLC, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. R. Keith Johnson, Stanley, North Carolina; John C. Woodman, SODOMA LAW, P.C., Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 Appeal: 16-1780 Doc: 41 Filed: 09/28/2017 Pg: 3 of 3 PER CURIAM: In 2010, Richard P. Meabon filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy relief and received a discharge. However, the bankruptcy court revoked Meabon’s discharge in 2014 because Meabon improperly failed to disclose certain trust interests on his Chapter 7 petition. Meabon appealed the revocation order to the district court, which dismissed his appeal as frivolous. In 2015, Meabon filed a Rule 60(b) motion in bankruptcy court seeking relief from the order revoking his discharge. The bankruptcy court denied his motion, and Meabon appealed to the district court. The district court again entered an order dismissing the appeal as frivolous. Meabon now appeals the district court’s order dismissing his appeal of the bankruptcy court’s order denying his Rule 60(b) motion. Meabon asserts that the district court abused its discretion by dismissing his appeal as frivolous. After reviewing the record and the district court’s opinion, we find the district court did not abuse its discretion or commit other reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially for the reasons stated by the district court. See Meabon v. Johnson, No. 3:15-cv-00398-RJC (W.D.N.C. June 6, 2016). 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 3

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?