Opinion
No. 11-2238
04-24-2012
In re: GEORGE VAN WAGNER, Debtor, GEORGE VAN WAGNER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BRANCH BANKING & TRUST COMPANY, et al; ATLAS TRI-STATE, SPE, LLC; PILL & PILL LLC, a/k/a David P. Pill, Defendants - Appellees, VANWOOD, LLC; HICKORY RIDGE, LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY; SECURITY TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, Debtors - Appellees, and CHAPTER 7 TRUSTEE, for George Van Wagner; UNITED STATES TRUSTEE; CHAPTER 7 TRUSTEE, for Hickory Ridge and Vanwood Trustees.
George Van Wagner, Appellant Pro Se. William L. Hallam, ROSENBERG, MARTIN & GREENBERG, LLP, Baltimore, Maryland; Kathy Santa Barbara, SANTA BARBARA LAW OFFICES, PLLC, Martinsburg, West Virginia; Danielle M. Waltz, FLAHERTY, SENSABAUGH & BONASSO, PLLC, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellees.
UNPUBLISHED
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. John Preston Bailey, Chief District Judge. (3:11-cv-00075-JPB-DJJ; 3:08-bk-00435; 3:07-bk-01671; 3:07-bk-01251; 3:10-ap-00021; 3:10-ap-00046)
Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
George Van Wagner, Appellant Pro Se. William L. Hallam, ROSENBERG, MARTIN & GREENBERG, LLP, Baltimore, Maryland; Kathy Santa Barbara, SANTA BARBARA LAW OFFICES, PLLC, Martinsburg, West Virginia; Danielle M. Waltz, FLAHERTY, SENSABAUGH & BONASSO, PLLC, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
George Van Wagner appeals the district court's order denying his motion for a stay of proceedings in the bankruptcy court pending appeal. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Van Wagner v. Branch Banking & Trust Co. Nos. 3:11-cv-00075-JPB-DJJ; 3:08-bk-00435; 3:07-bk-01671; 3:07-bk-01251; 3:10-ap-00021; 3:10-ap-00046 (N.D.W. Va. Nov. 1, 2011). 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