U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2010

United States v. Newbold

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided April 2, 2010 · Gregory, Shedd, Wilkinson

372 F. App'x 438

Counsel

Amy McDowell Newbold, Joseph K. Newbold, Appellants Pro Se. John W. Stone, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, James Scott Flowers, Hutchens, Senter & Britton, Fay-etteville, North Carolina, Mark Allan Baker, Johnson & Freedman, LLC, Atlanta, Georgia, Wendy Anne Owens, Law Office of Wendy A. Owens, PC, Savannah, Georgia, Donald Richard Pocock, Nelson, Mullins, Riley & Scarborough, LLP, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

United States v. $25,325.00 IN U.S. CURRENCY (District Court, M.D. North Carolina 2023)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Amy McDowell Newbold and Joseph K. Newbold appeal the district court’s order denying their motions pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 60(b)(6), 65(a), 70, for a preliminary injunction, modification of judgment, and an order to show cause for civil contempt. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Newbold, No. 1:05-cv-00625-TDS-PTS, 2009 WL 249393 (M.D.N.C. Feb. 2, 2009). We further deny Appellee Chase Home Finance LLC’s motion to dismiss the appeal. 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.