Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

MATTHEWS v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., 12-2130. (2013)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: infco20130801085 Visitors: 13
Filed: Aug. 01, 2013
Latest Update: Aug. 01, 2013
Summary: UNPUBLISHED Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM. Lucristia A. Matthews appeals the district court's order granting Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.'s motion to dismiss her claims alleging violation of the Maryland Consumer Protection Act, and for common law fraud, promissory estoppel, negligence, negligent misrepresentation, and breach of an implied-in-fact contract. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district co
More

UNPUBLISHED

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM.

Lucristia A. Matthews appeals the district court's order granting Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.'s motion to dismiss her claims alleging violation of the Maryland Consumer Protection Act, and for common law fraud, promissory estoppel, negligence, negligent misrepresentation, and breach of an implied-in-fact contract. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's judgment. See Matthews v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. 1:12-cv-01024-MJG (D. Md. Sept. 6, 2012); see also Spaulding v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 714 F.3d 769 (4th Cir. 2013). 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.

Source:  Leagle

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