Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

M. Modderno v. Surety Trustees, LLC, 17-1590 (2017)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 17-1590 Visitors: 21
Filed: Oct. 19, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-1590 M. FRANCINE MODDERNO; THE ESTATE OF CLAUDE V. BACHE, Plaintiffs - Appellants, v. SURETY TRUSTEES, LLC; OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (1:17-cv-00077-JCC-TCB) Submitted: October 17, 2017 Decided: October 19, 2017 Before FLOYD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMIL
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-1590 M. FRANCINE MODDERNO; THE ESTATE OF CLAUDE V. BACHE, Plaintiffs - Appellants, v. SURETY TRUSTEES, LLC; OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (1:17-cv-00077-JCC-TCB) Submitted: October 17, 2017 Decided: October 19, 2017 Before FLOYD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. M. Francine Modderno, Appellant Pro Se. Matthew Daniel Cohen, MCCABE WEISBERG & CONWAY, LLC, Laurel, Maryland; Allison Melton, TROUTMAN SANDERS, LLP, Virginia Beach, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: M. Francine Modderno on behalf of herself and the Estate of Claude V. Bache appeals the district court’s order denying relief on the complaint seeking damages and equitable relief in connection with a nonjudicial foreclosure sale of real property located in Loudoun County, Virginia. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Modderno v. Surety Trustees, LLC., No. 1:17-cv-00077-JCC-TCB (E.D. Va. Apr. 4, 2017). 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
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