From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Marvin

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Sep 1, 2009
332 F. App'x 9 (4th Cir. 2009)

Opinion

No. 09-1187.

Submitted: August 26, 2009.

Decided: September 1, 2009.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (3:08-cv-00695-RLW; 08-03071-KRH).

Brian M. Marvin, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Allen Canfield, Paul McCourt Curley, Canfield, Baer, Heller Johnston, LLP, Richmond, Virginia; Frank George Uvanni, Uvanni Associates, Ashland, Virginia; William Crewshaw Parkinson, Jr., Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and GREGORY and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished by PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


Brian Marvin appeals from the district court's order affirming the bankruptcy court's order dismissing his complaint in which he sought a determination that his debt for attorney fees ordered in a state court proceeding was dischargeable in his bankruptcy case. The bankruptcy court dismissed the complaint based on res judicata because the state court had determined that the debt was a domestic support obligation and therefore not dischargeable. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Marvin v. Marvin, Nos. 3:08-cv-00695-RLW; 08-03071-KRH, 2009 WL 152314 (E.D.Va. Jan. 21, 2009). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

In re Marvin

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Sep 1, 2009
332 F. App'x 9 (4th Cir. 2009)
Case details for

In re Marvin

Case Details

Full title:In re Brian M. MARVIN, Debtor, Brian M. Marvin, Plaintiff-Appellant v…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Date published: Sep 1, 2009

Citations

332 F. App'x 9 (4th Cir. 2009)

Citing Cases

Highland Constr. Mgmt. Servs., LP v. Wells Fargo (In re Highland Constr. Mgmt. Servs., LP)

The conclusion that a claim is barred by res judicata is a legal one, thus review is de novo. Providence Hall…