Case Name: In re BOURY, INCORPORATED, Debtor. Ormet Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. George Boury; Michael Boury; Nancy E. Boury; Pearl W. Boury; Boury, Incorporated; 808 Corporation; TJR, Incorporated; Boury Enterprises; Boury Enterprises, Incorporated, Defendants-Appellants, and Wheeling Inn, Incorporated, Defendant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-03-25
Citations: 59 F. App'x 602
Docket Number: No. 02-2125
Parties: In re BOURY, INCORPORATED, Debtor. Ormet Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. George Boury; Michael Boury; Nancy E. Boury; Pearl W. Boury; Boury, Incorporated; 808 Corporation; TJR, Incorporated; Boury Enterprises; Boury Enterprises, Incorporated, Defendants-Appellants, and Wheeling Inn, Incorporated, Defendant.
Judges: Before WILLIAMS and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Bankruptcy Reporter
Volume: 292
Pages: 602–603

Head Matter:
In re BOURY, INCORPORATED, Debtor. Ormet Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. George Boury; Michael Boury; Nancy E. Boury; Pearl W. Boury; Boury, Incorporated; 808 Corporation; TJR, Incorporated; Boury Enterprises; Boury Enterprises, Incorporated, Defendants-Appellants, and Wheeling Inn, Incorporated, Defendant.
No. 02-2125.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted March 20, 2003.
Decided March 25, 2003.
David Wyant, Bailey & Wyant, Wheeling, West Virginia; Richard T. Ricketts, Ricketts, Co., L.P.A., Columbus, Ohio; Ray Byrd, Schrader Byrd, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellants. Kimberly Luff Wakim, Robert L. Burns, Jr., Thorp, Reed & Armstrong, L.L.P., Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, for Appellee.
Before WILLIAMS and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
PER CURIAM.
Appellants appeal from the district court's order affirming the bankruptcy court's order granting Appellee relief from the automatic stay to pursue a state court action. We have reviewed the parties' briefs and the record on appeal and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Boury, Inc. v. Ormet, Nos. CA-01-134-5, BK-01-51663, AP-01-5175 (N.D.W.Va. Aug. 23, 2002). 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.