Bankruptcy
In re Barbara Kim DANG, Debtor, Barbara Kim Dang, Debtor-Appellant, v. BWW Law Group, f/k/a Bierman, Geesing & Ward, LLC; Quicken Loans; One West Bank, f/k/a Indy Mac Bank, Fsb; Deutche Bank National Trust Company; DB INDX 2006-AR27; Howard N. Bierman; Jacob Geesing; Carrie M. Ward; Bierman, Geesing & Ward, LLC; Does 1-200, Defendants-Appellees, Ellen W. Cosby, Trustee-Appellee
544 F. App'x 205·United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·2013
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
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
In re Barbara Kim DANG, Debtor, Barbara Kim Dang, Debtor-Appellant, v. BWW Law Group, f/k/a Bierman, Geesing & Ward, LLC; Quicken Loans; One West Bank, f/k/a Indy Mac Bank, Fsb; Deutche Bank National Trust Company; DB INDX 2006-AR27; Howard N. Bierman; Jacob Geesing; Carrie M. Ward; Bierman, Geesing & Ward, LLC; Does 1-200, Defendants-Appellees, Ellen W. Cosby, Trustee-Appellee.
No. 13-1740.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Oct. 22, 2013.
Decided: Oct. 24, 2013.
Barbara Kim Dang, Appellant Pro Se. Matthew Daniel Cohen, Bierman Geesing Ward & Wood, LLC, Bethesda, Maryland; Joseph Yenouskas, Daniel E. Zytnick, Goodwin & Procter, LLP, Washington, D.C.; Catherine Keller Hopkin, Tydings & Rosenberg, LLP, Baltimore, Maryland; Adam M. Lynn, Miles & Stockbridge, Ea-ston, Maryland; James Burton Travis, Crofton, Maryland; Ellen W. Cosby, Tow-son, Maryland, for Appellees.
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM:]
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Barbara Kim Dang appeals from the district court’s order dismissing her adversary proceeding that was filed in the bankruptcy court. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Dang v. BWW Law Group, No. 1:12-cv-03342-RDB, 2013 WL 1683910 (D.Md. Apr. 17, 2013). 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.