Diamond Falls Estates, LLC v. Nantahala Bank & Trust Company

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 2:14-cv-00007-MR-DLH. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000057701] [15-2210]

Appeal: 15-2210

Doc: 35

Filed: 04/07/2017

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-2210

DIAMOND FALLS ESTATES, LLC; SHIRLEY M. BUAFO; CHARLES K.
BUAFO,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
v.
NANTAHALA BANK & TRUST COMPANY,
Defendant – Appellee,
and
STEVE E. GRAVETT; EXCELL PARTNERS, LLC; JANE/JOHN DOES; LUXUR,
INC.; REALTY ACQUISITIONS, LLC,
Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina,
at Bryson City. Martin K. Reidinger, District Judge. (2:14-cv-00007-MR-DLH)

Argued: March 21, 2017

Decided: April 7, 2017

Before NIEMEYER and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Appeal: 15-2210

Doc: 35

Filed: 04/07/2017

Pg: 2 of 3

ARGUED: John Anthony Moore, MOORE LAW GROUP, LLC, Atlanta, Georgia, for
Appellants. Esther Elizabeth Manheimer, VAN WINKLE LAW FIRM, Asheville, North
Carolina, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Michael S. Rosier, ROSIER LAW FIRM, Lanham,
Maryland, for Appellants.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 15-2210

Doc: 35

Filed: 04/07/2017

Pg: 3 of 3

PER CURIAM:
This case arises under diversity of citizenship jurisdiction and involves a loan that
the Appellants, Diamond Falls Estates, LLC, Shirley M. Buafo, and Charles K. Buafo,
obtained from Nantahala Bank & Trust Company (“Nantahala”) to develop a North
Carolina property. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Nantahala on
the Appellants’ claims and on Nantahala’s counterclaims.
Appellants present the following issues for our review:
I.

Whether the district court erred by granting Nantahala’s motion for
summary judgment on the breach of contract claim;

II.

Whether the district court erred by granting Nantahala’s motion for
summary judgment on the breach of fiduciary duty and constructive
fraud claims;

III.

Whether the district court erred by granting Nantahala’s motion for
summary judgment on the negligent and fraudulent misrepresentation
claims; and

IV.

Whether the district court erred by granting Nantahala’s motion for
summary judgment on the unfair and deceptive trade practices claim.
Having had the benefit of full briefing and oral argument, and having fully

considered the parties’ contentions, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court
in its thorough memorandum opinion. Diamond Falls Estates, LLC v. Nantahala Bank &
Trust Co., No. 2:14-cv-00007-MR-DLH (W.D.N.C. Sept. 8, 2015).
AFFIRMED

3