First Owner's Ass'n of Forty Six Hundred Condominium, Inc. v. Gordon Properties, LLC (In Re Gordon Properties, LLC) , 433 F. App'x 173 ( 2011 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 10-1994
    IN RE:   GORDON PROPERTIES, LLC,
    Debtor,
    _________________________________
    FIRST OWNER’S ASSOCIATION OF FORTY SIX HUNDRED CONDOMINIUM,
    INCORPORATED,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    GORDON PROPERTIES, LLC,
    Defendant - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria.  Claude M. Hilton, Senior
    District Judge. (1:10-cv-00872-CMH-TCB; 09-18086-RGM; 09-01304-
    RGM)
    Submitted:   April 28, 2011                   Decided:   June 2, 2011
    Before NIEMEYER, DUNCAN, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Michael S. Dingman, Linda S. Broyhill, Robert M. Diamond,
    Richard D. Kelley, REED SMITH, LLP, Falls Church, Virginia;
    Robert M. Marino, REDMON PEYTON & BRASWELL, LLP, Alexandria,
    Virginia, for Appellant. Donald F. King, Stephen A. Cobb, ODIN,
    FELDMAN & PITTLEMAN, PC, Fairfax, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    2
    PER CURIAM:
    First   Owner’s     Association    of   Forty   Six   Hundred
    Condominium, Inc., appeals the district court’s order dismissing
    First Owner’s Association’s appeal from the bankruptcy court’s
    order denying the Gordon Properties’ motion for a preliminary
    injunction.   We have reviewed the record included on appeal, as
    well as the parties’ briefs, and find no reversible error in the
    district court’s conclusion that First Owner’s Association, as
    the prevailing party in the bankruptcy court, lacked standing to
    pursue the appeal.    See In re Urban Broad. Corp., 
    401 F.3d 236
    ,
    243 (4th Cir. 2005).        Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons
    stated by the district court.          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
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 10-1994

Citation Numbers: 433 F. App'x 173

Judges: Niemeyer, Duncan, Keenan

Filed Date: 6/2/2011

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024