In Re: Theda G. Harford, Debtor.theda G. Harford, Plaintiff-appellant, v. West Virginia Farm Credit, Aca, Successor in Interest Topotomac Valley Farm Credit, Aca; Small Businessadministration; Farm Credit Ofbaltimore, Defendants-appellees.donald E. Harford, Plaintiff-appellant, v. James Paul Geary, Ii; James Paul Geary, A; Charlesarmentrout & Heirs; Mary Virginia Armentrout;elkins Distributing Company,defendants-appellees, 995 F.2d 1062 (4th Cir. 1993)
Annotate this CaseAppeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Elkins. Robert Earl Maxwell, Chief District Judge. (CA-92-98-E, BK-83-103-E, CA-92-97-E)
Donald E. Harford, Theda G. Harford, Appellants Pro Se.
Joseph Algernon Wallace, Wallace, Harris & Sims, Elkins, West Virginia; James Willoughby Martin, Jr., Siegrist, Spelsberg, White, Martin & Conley, Clarksburg, West Virginia; Patrick Michael Flatley, Assistant United States Attorney, Elkins, West Virginia; James Paul Geary, II, Geary & Geary, L.C., Petersburg, West Virginia; Jerry David Moore, Franklin, West Virginia; Peter Gregory Zurbuch, Busch & Talbott, Elkins, West Virginia, for Appellees.
N.D.W. Va.
AFFIRMED.
Before HALL, WILKINSON, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
OPINION
In No. 92-2400, Theda G. Harford appeals from the district court's order affirming the bankruptcy court's order approving the trustee's application for disbursement of proceeds realized from the sale of certain real property. In No. 93-1069, Donald E. Harford appeals from the district court's order dismissing his Complaint to Set Aside Foreclosures. Our review of the records and district court's opinions in these cases discloses that these appeals are without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Harford v. West Virginia Farm Credit, No. CA-92-98-E (N.D.W. Va. Oct. 9, 1992); Harford v. Geary, No. CA-92-97-E (N.D.W. Va. Jan. 5, 1993). 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.
No. 92-2400, AFFIRMED No. 93-1069, AFFIRMED
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
