Kobi J. Mullins v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to add party [1000101393-2]; denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [1000101275-2] Originating case number: 3:16-cv-00841-REP Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000123495]. Mailed to: Mullins, White. [17-1536]

Download PDF
Appeal: 17-1536 Doc: 17 Filed: 07/24/2017 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-1536 KOBI J. MULLINS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.; SAMUEL I. WHITE, P.C.; SHUTTLEWORTH, RULOFF, SWAIN, HADDAD & MORECOCK, PC, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. (3:16-cv-00841-REP) Submitted: July 20, 2017 Decided: July 24, 2017 Before DUNCAN and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kobi J. Mullins, Appellant Pro Se. Terry Catherine Frank, KAUFMAN & CANOLES, PC, Richmond, Virginia; Michele Adams Mulligan, GOLIGHTLY MULLIGAN PLC, Richmond, Virginia; Samuel I. White, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 17-1536 Doc: 17 Filed: 07/24/2017 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Kobi J. Mullins appeals the district court’s order dismissing his complaint for failure to state a claim. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal for the reasons stated by the district court. Mullins v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. 3:16-cv-00841-REP (E.D. Va. Mar. 30, 2017). We also deny Mullins’ motion to add a party. 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. DISMISSED 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?