John Nell v. Wieland Financial Services LLC

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:13-cv-00639-JFA Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999406878]. Mailed to: John Nell & Rebecca Nell. [14-1350]

Appeal: 14-1350

Doc: 20

Filed: 07/31/2014

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-1350

JOHN A. NELL; REBECCA I. NELL, wife,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
v.
WIELAND FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC; SABADELL UNITED BANK, and
subsidiary VirtualBank,
Defendants - Appellees,
and
NORTHSTAR MORTGAGE GROUP LLC; JOHN WIELAND;
JOHN AND JANE DOES 1-10; BETH LOFTIS,

DAVE

SANDER;

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District
Judge. (0:13-cv-00639-JFA)

Submitted:

July 29, 2014

Decided:

July 31, 2014

Before NIEMEYER, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John A. Nell; Rebecca I. Nell, Appellants Pro Se.
Thomas
Chester Hildebrand, Jr., Kristina M. McGuire, PARKER, POE, ADAMS
& BERNSTEIN, LLC, Charleston, South Carolina; Phyllis Walker
Ewing, Robert E. Sumner, IV, MOORE & VAN ALLEN, PLLC,

Appeal: 14-1350

Doc: 20

Filed: 07/31/2014

Pg: 2 of 3

Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 14-1350

Doc: 20

Filed: 07/31/2014

Pg: 3 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Appellants John A. Nell and Rebecca I. Nell appeal the
district

court’s

magistrate
state

a

order

judge

claim

and

upon

accepting

dismissing
which

the
their

relief

can

recommendation
action
be

for

granted.

of

the

failure
We

to

have

reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the
district court.
00639-JFA

Nell v. Wieland Fin. Servs., LLC, No. 0:13-cv-

(D.S.C.

Mar.

18,

2014).

We

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

3