Bankruptcy
Sirina SUCKLAL, Debtor-Appellant, v. GOLDMAN SACHS MORTGAGE COMPANY, Creditor-Appellee, Nancy Spencer Grigsby, Trustee
586 F. App'x 134·United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·2014
Before WILKINSON and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, 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
Sirina SUCKLAL, Debtor-Appellant, v. GOLDMAN SACHS MORTGAGE COMPANY, Creditor-Appellee, Nancy Spencer Grigsby, Trustee.
No. 14-1729.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Nov. 25, 2014.
Decided: Dec. 4, 2014.
Sirina Sucklal, Appellant pro se. Gregory Christopher Mullen, Morris Hardwick Schneider, LLC, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Before WILKINSON and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM:]
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Sirina Sucklal appeals from the district court’s order dismissing as moot her appeal from ,the bankruptcy court’s order lifting the automatic stay and allowing the sale of her real property. We have reviewed the record and find no error in the bankruptcy court’s decision. See In re Frushour, 433 F.3d 393, 398 (4th Cir.2005) (noting that, in an appeal from the district court sitting as an appellate court from a bankruptcy court, we “review directly the bankruptcy court’s decision”). Accordingly, we affirm. 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.