Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Margaret Reaves v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, 18-1905 (2019)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 18-1905 Visitors: 1
Filed: Jan. 22, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1905 MARGARET REAVES, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC; LITTON LOAN SERVICING; POPULAR FINANCIAL; THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:16-cv-00186-FL) Submitted: January 17, 2019 Decided: January 22, 2019 Before WILKINSON and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, an
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1905 MARGARET REAVES, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC; LITTON LOAN SERVICING; POPULAR FINANCIAL; THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:16-cv-00186-FL) Submitted: January 17, 2019 Decided: January 22, 2019 Before WILKINSON and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed as modified by unpublished per curiam opinion. Margaret Reaves, Appellant Pro Se. Dennis Kyle Deak, TROUTMAN SANDERS, LLP, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Margaret Reaves appeals the district court’s order dismissing her amended complaint with prejudice for failure to timely serve Defendants. We have reviewed the record and find no abuse of discretion in the district court’s decision to dismiss the complaint. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Reaves v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, No. 5:16-cv-00186-FL (E.D.N.C. July 16, 2018). However, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m), we modify the district court’s order to a dismissal without prejudice. 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 AS MODIFIED 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