In re: Mary Ruth Bullins

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-1059
In Re: MARY RUTH BULLINS,
Debtor.
MARY RUTH BULLINS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
SOUTHLAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION; A & A, IN-
CORPORATED; MICHAEL ALLEN; D. G. ALLEN; JUNE
ALLEN; ROBERT GORDON; RUSSELL J. HOLLERS,
Trustee; VON L. ALLEN,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis-
trict of North Carolina, at Durham. William L. Osteen, District
Judge. (CA-98-489-1, BK-94-10830-13D, AP-94-2022)
Submitted: September 20, 2000 Decided: October 17, 2000
Before NIEMEYER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
Tomi W. Bryan, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellant. R. Frank
Gray, Shawna Y. Staton, JORDAN, PRICE, WALL, GRAY, JONES & CARLTON,
P.L.L.C., Raleigh, North Carolina; John C. Wainio, SPEARS, BARNES,
BAKER, WAINIO & WHALEY, L.L.P., Durham, North Carolina, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Mary Ruth Bullins appeals the district court’s order affirming
the bankruptcy court’s order denying relief on her claims that the
Defendants engaged in fraud against her, engaged in unfair and de-
ceptive trade practices, and that the two corporate Defendants were
the alter egos of individual Defendants such that the corporate
veil could be pierced. We have reviewed the record and the lower
courts’ opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we
affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Bullins v.
Southland Dev. Corp., Nos. CA-98-489-1; BK-94-10830-13D; AP-94-2022
(M.D.N.C. Dec. 3, 1999).
AFFIRMED

-- 2 of 2 --