Charles Haver v. Dariush Jahanian, No. 11-2330 (4th Cir. 2012)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-2330 In re: DARIUSH JAHANIAN, Debtor, -----------------------------CHARLES BARRETT HAVER; ELAINE HAVER; Plaintiffs Appellants, v. DARIUSH JAHANIAN, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Anthony John Trenga, District Judge. (1:11-cv-00723-AJT-IDD; 1:08-bk-10030; 1:10-ap1165) Submitted: September 27, 2012 Decided: October 1, 2012 Before MOTZ, DAVIS, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ernest P. Francis, ERNEST P. FRANCIS, LTD., Arlington, Virginia, for Appellants. James M. Stewart, Jr., George LeRoy Moran, MORAN MONTFORT, PLC, Fairfax, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Charles Barrett Haver and Elaine Haver appeal from the district court s order: (1) affirming the magistrate judge s order striking their brief as untimely filed and because the magistrate judge had not ruled on their motions for an extension of time; and (2) dismissing their appeal from the bankruptcy court s determination that Dariush Jahanian s liability to them is dischargeable in his bankruptcy case. The Havers appeal was dismissed after they failed to timely file their appeal brief and failed to file their motion for an extension of time prior See Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8006. to the due date for the brief. We have reviewed the record and the district court s order and find no reversible error and no abuse of discretion. See Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8001(a); In re SPR Corp., 45 F.3d 70, 74 (4th Cir. 1995); In re Serra Builders, Inc., 970 F.2d 1309, 1311 (4th Cir. 1992). Accordingly, we affirm the district court s order. 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

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.