Rose v. Bargeski ( 2007 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-1480
CHERYL E. ROSE, Trustee,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
ALBERT M. BARGESKI,
Defendant - Appellee,
and
AUDREY YVONNE BARGESKI,
Debtor - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, District Judge. (8:05-cv-
00962-RWT; 8:05-cv-01410-RWT; BK-04-01432)
Submitted: June 27, 2007 Decided: July 30, 2007
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James M. Hoffman, John D. Sadler, SHULMAN, ROGERS, GANDAL, PORDY &
ECKER, P.A., Rockville, Maryland, for Appellant. Laura J.
Margulies, LAURA MARGULIES & ASSOCIATES, Rockville, Maryland, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Cheryl E. Rose, the trustee in the underlying bankruptcy
proceeding, appeals from the district court’s order affirming the
bankruptcy court’s order finding that a conveyance of certain real
property was an avoidable post-petition transfer under 11 U.S.C.
§ 549 (2000), but reducing the amount of the bankruptcy court’s
judgment in her favor from $68,929.18 to $22,080.05. We have
reviewed the record, including the opinions of the courts below, as
well as the Trustee’s brief and we find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s decision for the
reasons stated in its opinion affirming as modified the bankruptcy
court’s order. Rose v. Bargeski (In re Bargeski); Case Nos. 8:05-
cv-00962-RWT; 8:05-cv-01410-RWT; BK-04-01432 (D. Md. Mar. 31,
2006). 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
- 2 -