Continental Casualty Company v. Jeff F. Curran, III


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for stay pending appeal [1000086894-2]; denying Motion for John F. Jef Curran, III to represent Gargoyles, Inc. [1000106960-2] Originating case number: 1:14-cv-01183-JFM Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000185380]. Mailed to: John F. Curran III; John E. Howell; William E. Smith. [17-1618]

Download PDF
Appeal: 17-1618 Doc: 27 Filed: 11/02/2017 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-1618 CONTINENTAL CASUALTY COMPANY, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. GARGOYLES, INC.; JOHN F. CURRAN, III, Defendants - Appellants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Senior District Judge. (1:14-cv-01183-JFM) Submitted: October 25, 2017 Decided: November 2, 2017 Before KING, SHEDD, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed in part and affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion. John F. Curran, III, Appellant Pro Se. Ashley Elisabeth Eiler, John E. Howell, William E. Smith, WILEY REIN, LLP, Washington, DC, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 17-1618 Doc: 27 Filed: 11/02/2017 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Proceeding pro se, John F. Curran, III, seeks to appeal on behalf of himself and Gargoyles, Inc., the district court’s order denying his post-judgment motion to vacate judgment and stay proceedings against Gargoyles, Inc. Curran has also moved on appeal to stay proceedings and represent Gargoyles, Inc. However, Gargoyles, Inc., may only proceed in federal court through licensed counsel. See Rowland v. Cal. Men’s Colony, Unit II Men’s Advisory Council, 506 U.S. 194, 201-03 (1993); In re Under Seal, 749 F.3d 276, 290 n.17 (4th Cir. 2014). We therefore dismiss the appeal as to Gargoyles, Inc. As to Curran, we have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny his pending motions and affirm the district court’s order. See Continental Cas. Co. v. Gargoyles, Inc., No. 1:14-cv-01183-JFM (D. Md. May 2, 2017). 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. DISMISSED IN PART; AFFIRMED IN PART 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?