Ademiluyi v. Citimortgage, Inc.

Fourth Circuit

Ademiluyi v. Citimortgage, Inc.

642 F. App'x 289

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedApril 1, 2016

DocketNo. 15-2296

StatusPublished

This text of 642 F. App'x 289 (Ademiluyi v. Citimortgage, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ademiluyi v. Citimortgage, Inc., 642 F. App'x 289 (4th Cir. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Christie M. Ademiluyi appeals from the district court’s orders dismissing her complaint for failure to state a claim, Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), because, among other things, she lacked standing to challenge the transfer of her mortgage note. She also appeals from the district court’s order denying her motion for leave to amend her complaint. The court determined that, because she lacked standing, amendment would be futile. We have reviewed the record and the arguments presented on appeal, and we find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially for the reasons stated by the district court. Ademiluyi v. Citimortgage, Inc., No. 8:15— cv-00777-JFM (D. Md. Sept. 29, 2016 & Oct. ,20, 2016). 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,

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Christie M. Ademiluyi appeals from the district court’s orders dismissing her complaint for failure to state a claim, Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), because, among other things, she lacked standing to challenge the transfer of her mortgage note. She also appeals from the district court’s order denying her motion for leave to amend her complaint. The court determined that, because she lacked standing, amendment would be futile. We have reviewed the record and the arguments presented on appeal, and we find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially for the reasons stated by the district court. Ademiluyi v. Citimortgage, Inc., No. 8:15— cv-00777-JFM (D. Md. Sept. 29, 2016 & Oct. ,20, 2016). 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,

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

642 F. App'x 289, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ademiluyi-v-citimortgage-inc-ca4-2016.