Corporations
Stanley Marvin CAMPBELL, Trustee in Bankruptcy for ESA ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST, INC., Plaintiff, and Prospect Capital Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HOULIHAN SMITH & COMPANY, INC., Defendant-Appellee, and Nathan M. Bender; Adkisson, Sherbert & Associates; Charles J. Cole; Jacob Cole; Sandra Dee Cole; David C. Eppling; Michael Anthony Habowski; Tracey Hawley; John M. Mitchell; Dennis M. Molesevich; Houlihan Smith; Shelton Smith; Suntrust Banks, Inc.; Cherry Bekaert and Holland LLP; Elliot & Warren; Chester J. Banull, Defendants
616 F. App'x 83·United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·2015
Before SHEDD and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Stanley Marvin CAMPBELL, Trustee in Bankruptcy for ESA ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST, INC., Plaintiff, and Prospect Capital Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HOULIHAN SMITH & COMPANY, INC., Defendant-Appellee, and Nathan M. Bender; Adkisson, Sherbert & Associates; Charles J. Cole; Jacob Cole; Sandra Dee Cole; David C. Eppling; Michael Anthony Habowski; Tracey Hawley; John M. Mitchell; Dennis M. Molesevich; Houlihan Smith; Shelton Smith; Suntrust Banks, Inc.; Cherry Bekaert and Holland LLP; Elliot & Warren; Chester J. Banull, Defendants.
No. 14-1988.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 27, 2015.
Decided: Sept. 18, 2015.
Robert C. Bowers, Moore & Van Allen, PLLC, Charlotte, North Carolina; Adam M. Burton, Karl C. Huth, IV, Prospect Administration, LLC, New York, New York, for Appellant. Richard P. Darke, Duane Morris LLP, Chicago, Illinois, for Appellee.
Before SHEDD and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM:]
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Prospect Capital Corporation appeals from the district court’s order accepting the' recommendation of the magistrate judge and granting Houlihan Smith & Company, Inc.’s motion to dismiss the claims against it and denying Prospect Capital’s request for leave to amend the complaint. We have reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments on appeal, and we find no abuse of discretion and no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Prospect Capital Corp. v. Houlihan Smith & Co., No. 3:09-cv-00465-MOC-DCK (W.D.N.C. Aug. 20, 2014). 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.