In re: DEBORAH FAYE PARKER v. Dgp Holdings, LLC; Gregory P. Parker

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 24-1800
In re: DEBORAH FAYE PARKER,
Debtor.
------------------------------
JANET M. MEIBURGER, Trustee,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
DGP HOLDINGS, LLC; GREGORY P. PARKER,
Defendants - Appellants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:24-cv-00190-LMB-WBP)
Submitted: January 23, 2025 Decided: January 27, 2025
Before WILKINSON, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
ON BRIEF: Robert S. Brandt, THE LAW OFFICE OF ROBERT S. BRANDT,
Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellants. Janet M. Meiburger, THE MEIBURGER LAW

-- 1 of 4 --

2
FIRM, P.C., McLean, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 2 of 4 --

3
PER CURIAM:
DGP Holdings, LLC and Gregory P. Parker appeal the district court’s order
affirming the bankruptcy court’s order dissolving DGP Holdings, which owns a rental
property and collects rent. Prior to the bankruptcy petition, Parker and his wife Deborah
Parker, the debtor, held equal shares in DGP Holdings. Upon Deborah Parker’s filing of
the bankruptcy petition, the trustee, Janet M. Meiburger, took over Deborah’s interest in
DGP Holdings. Meiburger and Parker disagree on whether DGP Holdings should sell the
rental property, but, as each party owns a 50% interest in the company, neither may take
any action without the other’s consent. Following a hearing in an adversary proceeding
initiated by Meiburger seeking dissolution of DGP Holdings, the bankruptcy court granted
Meiburger’s requested relief.
Where a district court acts as a bankruptcy appellate court, this court reviews the
bankruptcy court’s decisions independently, reviewing the factual findings for clear error
and legal conclusions de novo. SG Homes Assocs., LP v. Marinucci, 718 F.3d 327, 334
(4th Cir. 2013). We have reviewed the record and find the bankruptcy court did not
commit clear error in its factual determinations where it conducted an evidentiary hearing
and determined that the parties were deadlocked rendering it not reasonably practical to
carry out the business of DGP Holdings. Furthermore, we find the bankruptcy court
applied the correct legal standard in determining that dissolution of DGP Holdings was
warranted. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. Meiburger v. DGP Holdings,
LLC, No. 1:24-cv-00190-LMB-WBP (E.D. Va., July 19, 2024). We dispense with oral

-- 3 of 4 --

4
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED

-- 4 of 4 --