William Taccino v. HomEq Servicing


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:08-cv-00185-JPB Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998452906] [10-1260]

Download PDF
William Taccino v. HomEq Servicing Doc. 0 Case: 10-1260 Document: 20 Date Filed: 10/26/2010 Page: 1 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-1260 WILLIAM A. TACCINO; MARLENE M. TACCINO, Plaintiffs - Appellants, v. HOMEQ SERVICING; MANCINI & ASSOCIATES; U.S. BANK N/A; MORRIS SCHNEIDER PRYOR JOHNSON & FREEDMAN, LLC; G. DOUGLAS REINHARD; RICK CONNER; EXPRESS MORTGAGE FINANCIAL SERVICES, P.C., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. John Preston Bailey, Chief District Judge. (3:08-cv-00185-JPB) Submitted: September 16, 2010 Decided: October 26, 2010 Before NIEMEYER, DAVIS, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William A. Taccino, Marlene M. Taccino, Appellants Pro Se. Wendy Anne Owens, LAW OFFICE OF WENDY A. OWENS, PC, Savannah, Georgia; Marshall Howard Ross, WHARTON, ALDHIZER & WEAVER, PLC, Harrisonburg, Virginia; Jason Patrick Foster, STEPTOE & JOHNSON, LLP, Martinsburg, West Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Dockets.Justia.com Case: 10-1260 Document: 20 Date Filed: 10/26/2010 Page: 2 PER CURIAM: William A. Taccino and Marlene M. Taccino appeal the district court's order granting summary judgment to Defendants in this civil action. reversible error. by the district We have reviewed the record and find no Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated court. Taccino v. Homeq Serv., No. 3:08-cv-00185-JPB (N.D. W. Va. Feb. 18, 2010). oral argument because in the the facts and legal before We dispense with contentions the court are and adequately presented materials argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?