Filed: Oct. 02, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-1477 JAMES BUECHLER, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. YOUR WINE & SPIRIT SHOPPE, INC., d/b/a Your Wine & Spirit Shoppe, Defendant – Appellee, and DOES 1-10, inclusive, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. James K. Bredar, District Judge. (1:11-cv-03280-JKB) Submitted: September 19, 2012 Decided: October 2, 2012 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirme
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-1477 JAMES BUECHLER, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. YOUR WINE & SPIRIT SHOPPE, INC., d/b/a Your Wine & Spirit Shoppe, Defendant – Appellee, and DOES 1-10, inclusive, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. James K. Bredar, District Judge. (1:11-cv-03280-JKB) Submitted: September 19, 2012 Decided: October 2, 2012 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-1477 JAMES BUECHLER, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. YOUR WINE & SPIRIT SHOPPE, INC., d/b/a Your Wine & Spirit Shoppe, Defendant – Appellee, and DOES 1-10, inclusive, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. James K. Bredar, District Judge. (1:11-cv-03280-JKB) Submitted: September 19, 2012 Decided: October 2, 2012 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. E. David Hoskins, THE LAW OFFICE OF E. DAVID HOSKINS, LLC, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellant. Douglas C. Meister, MEYERS, RODBELL & ROSENBAUM, P.A., Riverdale, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: James Buechler appeals the district court’s orders granting summary judgment in favor of the Appellee on Buechler’s claims alleging a violation of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act and denying reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s orders. 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
