Ava Sawyer v. Dean Worcester, No. 09-2131 (4th Cir. 2010)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-2131 In Re: AVA MAUREEN SAWYER, Debtor. -------------------------AVA MAUREEN SAWYER, Plaintiff Appellant, v. DEAN S. WORCESTER, Defendant Appellee, and ESTATE OF PRESTON CONNER, SR., Creditor. No. 09-2133 In Re: AVA MAUREEN SAWYER, Debtor. -------------------------AVA MAUREEN SAWYER, Plaintiff Appellant, v. DEAN S. WORCESTER, Defendant Appellee, v. ESTATE OF PRESTON CONNER, Movant. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:09-cv-00431-LMB-IDD; 1:09-cv-00298-LMB-IDD; 07-13021-RGM) Submitted: November 18, 2010 Decided: December 9, 2010 Before KING and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ava Maureen Sawyer, Appellant Pro Se. John David Griffin, Deborah Campbell Welsh, WINCHESTER LAW GROUP P.C., Winchester, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: In seeks to these appeal consolidated the district appeals, court s Ava Maureen orders Sawyer affirming the bankruptcy court s orders overruling Sawyer s objection to the validity of the Appellee s claim in her Chapter 13 proceeding and denying her motions for reconsideration. the record and find no reversible error. for the reasons Worcester, Nos. stated by the Accordingly, we affirm district 1:09-cv-00431-LMB-IDD; We have reviewed court. Sawyer v. 1:09-cv-00298-LMB-IDD; 07-13021-RGM (E.D. Va. filed Aug. 26, 2009 & entered Aug. 27, 2009; Aug. 31, 2009). dismiss the appeals motion as moot. facts and materials legal before The Appellees have filed a motion to for failure to prosecute. We deny the We dispense with oral argument because the contentions are adequately the and argument court presented would not in the aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 3

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.