U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 1998

In Re: Litzenberg v.

In Re: Litzenberg v.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided March 12, 1998

In Re: Litzenberg v.

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-2526

In Re: DOROTHY P. LITZENBERG, Plaintiff - Appellant.

No. 97-2692

DOROTHY P. LITZENBERG (Mrs.), Plaintiff - Appellant, and

CECIL COUNTY LAND CORPORATION, Secretary/ Treasurer Dorothy Litzenberg, Plaintiff, versus

JOHN H. LITZENBERG; CECIL FEDERAL BANK; CONESTOGA TITLE COMPANY, Office of Thrift Supervision, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Chief District Judge. (MISC-94-67, CA-97-3681-JFM) Submitted: February 12, 1998 Decided: March 12, 1998

Before MURNAGHAN and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Dorothy P. Litzenberg, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: In these consolidated appeals, Appellant appeals the district court's orders denying several motions filed in regard to a previ- ously litigated civil action. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinions and orders and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. In Re: Litzenberg, No. MISC-94-67; CA-97-3681-JFM (D. Md. Oct. 17 & Dec. 8, 1997). We also deny Appellant's motion to recuse the dis- trict court judge, her petition for immediate review. 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

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.