Timothy Davis v. Universal Composition Service


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:16-cv-00036-CMH-JFA Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000060457].. [16-1775]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-1775 Doc: 35 Filed: 04/12/2017 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-1775 TIMOTHY E. DAVIS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. SAMUEL I. WHITE, P.C.; WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., Defendants – Appellees, and UNIVERSAL COMPOSITION SERVICES, LLC; ALTAF U. KHAN, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:16-cv-00036-CMH-JFA) Submitted: March 30, 2017 Decided: April 12, 2017 Before SHEDD and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bernard E. Goodman, David Ludwig, DUNLAP BENNETT & LUDWIG, PLLC, Vienna, Virginia; Roger C. Simmons, Shawn P. Cavenee, Christopher F. deBettencourt, GORDON & SIMMONS, LLC, Frederick, Maryland, for Appellant. Mary C. Zinsner, S. Appeal: 16-1775 Doc: 35 Filed: 04/12/2017 Pg: 2 of 3 Mohsin Reza, TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP, Tysons Corner, Virginia; Allison Melton, TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP, Virginia Beach, Virginia; Lisa Hudson Kim, SAMUEL I. WHITE, P.C., Virginia Beach, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 Appeal: 16-1775 Doc: 35 Filed: 04/12/2017 Pg: 3 of 3 PER CURIAM: Timothy E. Davis appeals from the district court’s order dismissing his amended complaint in which he raised numerous claims arising out of the foreclosure on his property. We have reviewed the record included on appeal, as well as the parties’ briefs, and find no error in the district court’s dismissal of Davis’ claims. Specifically, we find no merit to Davis’ claims asserting breach of fiduciary duty or breach of contract under Virginia law; nor do we find an actionable claim under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692 (2012). Therefore we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Davis v. Samuel I. White, P.C., No. 1:16-cv-00036-CMH-JFA (E.D. Va. June 10, 2016). We dispense with oral 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 3

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?