Kathleen Arnold v. Citimortgage, Incorporated

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 8:07-cv-02617-RWT Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998464955] [10-1233]

Kathleen Arnold v. Citimortgage, Incorporated

Doc. 0

Case: 10-1233 Document: 23

Date Filed: 11/15/2010

Page: 1

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-1233 KATHLEEN ARNOLD; TIMOTHY A. COTTEN, Plaintiffs ­ Appellants, v. CITIMORTGAGE, INCORPORATED, Assignee; LEHMAN BROTHERS BANK, F.S.B.; AURORA LOAN SERVICES LLC; WELLS FARGO; CONGRESSIONAL FUNDING USA, LLC; STEWART TITLE GROUP, LLC; MARTIN DENNIS; MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INCORPORATED; RANDA SAMIR AZZAM, Substitute Trustee; DANIEL J. PESACHOWITZ; SAMUEL I. WHITE, Defendants ­ Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, District Judge. (8:07cv-02617-RWT) Submitted: November 2, 2010 Decided: November 15, 2010

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kathleen Arnold; Timothy A. Cotten, Appellants Pro Se. Bruce Edward Alexander, David M. Souders, Sandra B. Vipond, WEINER, BRODSKY, SIDMAN & KIDER, PC, Washington, D.C.; Glenn Cline, BALLARD SPAHR, LLP, Baltimore, Maryland; Bruce Edward Covahey, Mark S. Devan, COVAHEY, BOOZER, DEVAN & DORE, PA, Towson, Maryland; for Appellees. Martin Dennis, Appellee Pro Se.

Dockets.Justia.com

Case: 10-1233 Document: 23

Date Filed: 11/15/2010

Page: 2

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Case: 10-1233 Document: 23

Date Filed: 11/15/2010

Page: 3

PER CURIAM: Kathleen Arnold and Timothy A. Cotten appeal the

district court's order granting Defendants' motions to dismiss their civil action. The record does not contain a transcript of Appellants have the burden

the hearing on Defendants' motions.

of including in the record on appeal a transcript of all parts of the proceedings material to the issues raised on appeal.

See Fed. R. App. P. 10(b); 4th Cir. R. 10(b). proceeding transcripts on at appeal in forma pauperis in

While appellants are entitled to

government

expense

certain

limited

circumstances, see 28 U.S.C. § 753(f) (2006), Arnold and Cotten paid the appellate filing fee and neither has filed an

application for in forma pauperis status.

By failing to produce

a transcript or to qualify for the production of a transcript at government expense, Arnold and Cotten have waived review of the issues on appeal that depend on the transcript to show error. See Powell v. Estelle, 959 F.2d 22, 26 (5th Cir. 1992)

(per curiam); Keller v. Prince George's Cnty., 827 F.2d 952, 954 n.1 (4th Cir. 1987). As no error appears on the record before We dispense with oral

us, we affirm the district court's order.

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 3