Filed: Aug. 10, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1644 DAWN V. MARTIN; MIGUEL GALLARDO, Plaintiffs - Appellants, v. JOHANNES BRONDUM; LONG AND FOSTER REAL ESTATE, INC.; LONG AND FOSTER COMPANIES; LONG AND FOSTER REALTORS; PATRICIA KNIGHT, a/k/a Patricia Knight Lambert; SUSAN HAUGHTON, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Anthony J. Trenga, District Judge. (1:11-cv-01118-AJT-TCB) Submitted:
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1644 DAWN V. MARTIN; MIGUEL GALLARDO, Plaintiffs - Appellants, v. JOHANNES BRONDUM; LONG AND FOSTER REAL ESTATE, INC.; LONG AND FOSTER COMPANIES; LONG AND FOSTER REALTORS; PATRICIA KNIGHT, a/k/a Patricia Knight Lambert; SUSAN HAUGHTON, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Anthony J. Trenga, District Judge. (1:11-cv-01118-AJT-TCB) Submitted: ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1644 DAWN V. MARTIN; MIGUEL GALLARDO, Plaintiffs - Appellants, v. JOHANNES BRONDUM; LONG AND FOSTER REAL ESTATE, INC.; LONG AND FOSTER COMPANIES; LONG AND FOSTER REALTORS; PATRICIA KNIGHT, a/k/a Patricia Knight Lambert; SUSAN HAUGHTON, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Anthony J. Trenga, District Judge. (1:11-cv-01118-AJT-TCB) Submitted: July 29, 2016 Decided: August 10, 2016 Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dawn V. Martin, LAW OFFICES OF DAWN V. MARTIN, Washington, D.C., for Appellants. Susan F. Earman, FRIEDLANDER, FRIEDLANDER & EARMAN, PC, McLean, Virginia; Mikhael D. Charnoff, PERRY CHARNOFF PLLC, Arlington, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Dawn V. Martin and Miguel Gallardo appeal the district court’s order denying their Fed. R. Civ. Rule 60(b) motion challenging the taxation of costs and denying their request to submit color photographs by electronic means. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Martin v. Brondum, No. 1:11-cv- 01118-AJT-TCB (E.D. Va. May 29, 2014). 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 2