Filed: Feb. 02, 2012
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-1962 PERCY LEE CLAY; DIANE CLAY, Plaintiffs - Appellants, v. C T CORPORATION SYSTEM, d/b/a Citimortgage, Inc.; CITIMORTGAGE, INC., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Jr., District Judge. (1:08-cv-00925-WO-PTS) Submitted: January 31, 2012 Decided: February 2, 2012 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-1962 PERCY LEE CLAY; DIANE CLAY, Plaintiffs - Appellants, v. C T CORPORATION SYSTEM, d/b/a Citimortgage, Inc.; CITIMORTGAGE, INC., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Jr., District Judge. (1:08-cv-00925-WO-PTS) Submitted: January 31, 2012 Decided: February 2, 2012 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. A..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-1962 PERCY LEE CLAY; DIANE CLAY, Plaintiffs - Appellants, v. C T CORPORATION SYSTEM, d/b/a Citimortgage, Inc.; CITIMORTGAGE, INC., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Jr., District Judge. (1:08-cv-00925-WO-PTS) Submitted: January 31, 2012 Decided: February 2, 2012 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Percy Lee Clay, Diane Clay, Appellants Pro Se. Joseph Samuel Dowdy, Pamela Wachter McAfee, Meghan E. B. Pridemore, NELSON MULLINS RILEY & SCARBOROUGH, LLP, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Percy Lee Clay and Diane Clay appeal the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of CitiMortgage, Inc., on their claims for breach of contract, conversion, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Clay v. C T Corporation, No. 1:08-cv-00925-WO-PTS (M.D.N.C. Aug. 11, 2011). We deny the Clays’ motions to recuse and 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 2