Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Hicks v. Wilshire Credit Corporation, 07-1287 (2008)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 07-1287 Visitors: 108
Filed: Jan. 07, 2008
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-1287 GARY D. HICKS; CLYDE CASEY; JEAN CASEY, Plaintiffs - Appellants, versus WILSHIRE CREDIT CORPORATION, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, District Judge. (8:06-cv- 02195-RWT) Submitted: November 30, 2007 Decided: January 7, 2008 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. M. Alber
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-1287 GARY D. HICKS; CLYDE CASEY; JEAN CASEY, Plaintiffs - Appellants, versus WILSHIRE CREDIT CORPORATION, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, District Judge. (8:06-cv- 02195-RWT) Submitted: November 30, 2007 Decided: January 7, 2008 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. M. Albert Figinski, John A. Pica, Jr., Michael W. Reed, Thomas P. Kelly, LAW OFFICES OF PETER G. ANGELOS, PC, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellants. Brian L. Moffet, GORDON, FEINBLATT, ROTHMAN, HOFFBERGER & HOLLANDER, LLC, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Gary Hicks, Clyde Casey, and Jean Casey appeal the district court’s order denying their motion to remand and granting Wilshire Credit Corporation’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. We have reviewed the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court at the hearing held on February 26, 2007. Hicks v. Wilshire Credit Corp., No. 8:06-cv- 02195-RWT) (D. Md. Feb. 26, 2007). 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 -
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer