White v. Aames Home Loan

Type

Opinion of the Court

Per curiam

Yes — no individual author

Filed

April 16, 2003

Case

White v. Aames Home Loan

Case status

Decided

Source The opinion is per curiam: issued in the name of the court, with no individual author. This is a fact about the opinion, not missing data.

The first passage of the document, as extracted by the source provider.

JUDGMENT PER CURIAM. This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the brief filed by appellant. The court has determined that the issues presented occasion no need for an opinion. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C. Cir. Rule 34(j). It is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s orders filed July 15, 2002, and August 29, 2002, be affirmed. Appellant failed to present to the district court or the bankruptcy court his arguments that the bankruptcy court erred in concluding appellant filed the Chapter 13 petition in bad faith; the court failed to warn him that he was required to show good faith; appellant’s testimony established that he filed the petition in good faith; and automatic stays are effective without no *831 tice to creditors. Accordingly, the court will not consider them. See District of Columbia v. Air Florida, Inc., 750 F.2d 1077, 1084 (D.C.Cir.1984). As to appellant’s argument that the bankruptcy court erred in finding Aames Home Loan lacked notice of the Chapter 13 filing before the foreclosure sale, appellant has failed to show clear error. In light of the evidence adduced at the January 24, 200…

Source Extract supplied by CourtListener. Benchlight does not host the document — read the authoritative text in the court's own PDF.