Case Name: John T. COPLEY; Bankruptcy Estate of John T. Copley, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Janet Smith HOLBROOK, in her individual and official capacity; Indemnity Insurance Company of North America; David Konrad; Huddleston, Bolen, Beatty, Porter & Copen, LLP, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-02-26
Citations: 56 F. App'x 174
Docket Number: No. 02-2242
Parties: John T. COPLEY; Bankruptcy Estate of John T. Copley, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Janet Smith HOLBROOK, in her individual and official capacity; Indemnity Insurance Company of North America; David Konrad; Huddleston, Bolen, Beatty, Porter & Copen, LLP, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 56
Pages: 174–174

Head Matter:
John T. COPLEY; Bankruptcy Estate of John T. Copley, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Janet Smith HOLBROOK, in her individual and official capacity; Indemnity Insurance Company of North America; David Konrad; Huddleston, Bolen, Beatty, Porter & Copen, LLP, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 02-2242.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 20, 2003.
Decided Feb. 26, 2003.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Huntington. Joseph Robert Goodwin, District Judge. (CA-01-782-3).
John T. Copley, Appellant Pro Se. Herbert Joseph Stapleton, III, Huddleston, Bolen, Beatty, Porter & Copen, Huntington, West Virginia, for Appellees.
Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
John T. Copley appeals from the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his action in which he sought recovery of damages from the former trustee of his bankruptcy estate, counsel for the trustee, and the trustee's bonding company. We have reviewed the record and the opinion of the district court and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Copley v. Holbrook, No. CA-01-782-3 (S.D.W.Va. Sept. 26, 2002). We deny Copley's motions to supplement the record and for correction of the bankruptcy court's docket sheet and 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.