NCNB Financial v. Shumate

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

NCNB FINANCIAL SERVICES,

INCORPORATED,

Plaintiff-Appellee, and

ROY V. CREASY, Trustee,

Plaintiff, v.

No. 95-2048 JOSEPH B. SHUMATE, JR.,

Defendant-Appellant, and

COLEMAN FURNITURE CORPORATION

PENSION PLAN; JOHN R. PATTERSON,

Trustee,

Defendants.

In Re: JOSEPH B. SHUMATE, JR.,

Appellant, and

ROY V. CREASY, Trustee,

Plaintiff,

No. 95-2824 v.

COLEMAN FURNITURE CORPORATION

PENSION PLAN; JOHN R. PATTERSON,

Trustee,

Defendants.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke.

Glen M. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CA-83-279-R, CA-86-272-R, CA-86-432-R, CA-86-433-R) Submitted: March 21, 1996

Decided: April 3, 1996

Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER,* Senior Circuit Judge. _________________________________________________________________ Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. _________________________________________________________________ COUNSEL

Joseph B. Shumate, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Stephen McQuiston Hodges, PENN, STUART, ESKRIDGE & JONES, Abingdon, Vir- ginia, for Appellee. _________________________________________________________________ Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). _________________________________________________________________ OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Joseph B. Shumate, Jr., appeals from the district court's orders (1) denying his motion to stay NCNB's garnishment summons and writ of execution (No. 95-2048) and (2) denying his motion for return of $3,123.04, which was deducted for administrative expenses, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 1914(b) (West 1994), from his funds held in the dis- trict court's registry (No. 95-2824).

This court has already determined that the pension funds at issue in this appeal are not entitled to protection under the anti-alienation provisions afforded by ERISA (29 U.S.C. § 1056(d)(1) (1988)), after an actual distribution. Nationsbank v. Shumate , No. 93-2092 (4th Cir. Dec. 29, 1994) (unpublished). Accordingly, Shumate's claims are barred by res judicata. Further, the district court properly determined that the administrative expenses which Shumate seeks to have returned to him were lawfully deducted. Accordingly, we affirm. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argu- ment would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED