Daryl Green v. Prince George's County Office of Child Support, No. 22-1705 (4th Cir. 2023)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 22-1705 DARYL ANTHONY GREEN, Debtor - Appellant, v. PRINCE GEORGE’S COUNTY OFFICE OF CHILD SUPPORT; PRINCE GEORGE’S COUNTY OFFICE OF CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT, Creditors - Appellees, and TIMOTHY P. BRANIGAN, Trustee - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, Senior District Judge. (8:21-cv-02441-PJM) Submitted: April 20, 2023 Decided: April 24, 2023 Before KING and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Daryl Anthony Green, Appellant Pro Se. Karen Hess Rohrbaugh, Assistant Attorney General, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland; Timothy P. Branigan, LAW OFFICE OF TIMOTHY P. BRANIGAN, Laurel, Maryland for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Daryl Anthony Green appeals the district court’s orders: (1) dismissing his appeal from the bankruptcy court’s order dismissing his Chapter 13 bankruptcy case, and (2) imposing a prefiling injunction against him. With respect to the dismissal order, we have reviewed the record and find no reversible error and no abuse of discretion. See Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8003(a)(2); 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). We also find no abuse of discretion by the district court in imposing monetary sanctions and a prefiling injunction upon finding that Green engaged in abusive, repetitive, and vexatious bankruptcy filings. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. Green v. Prince George’s Cnty. Ofc. of Child Support, No. 8:21-cv-02441-PJM (D. Md. June 16, 2022). We deny Green’s motions: for an extension of time to file transcripts and to amend his informal brief; to address his appeals from the dismissal of two other bankruptcy court actions; for judicial notice, to strike the sanctions order, and for leave to file federal litigation; and for a stay pending appeal and a preliminary injunction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not 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.
