John Behrmann v. Michael Goldstein

698 F. App'x 134
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedOctober 4, 2017
Docket17-1102
StatusUnpublished

This text of 698 F. App'x 134 (John Behrmann v. Michael Goldstein) 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
John Behrmann v. Michael Goldstein, 698 F. App'x 134 (4th Cir. 2017).

Opinion

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

John R. Behrmann and Nancy Behrm-ann, individually and as assignees of 38 individuals listed in their second amended complaint, appeal from the district court’s order granting the Defendants’ motions to dismiss and dismissing their complaint. We have reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments on appeal, and we find no reversible error. To the extent that any of their claims are not barred by collateral estoppel, they were filed beyond the applicable statute of limitations. Accordingly, we affirm. See Scott v. United States, 328 F.3d 132, 137 (4th Cir. 2003) (providing that appeals court may “affirm on any ground appearing in the record, including theories not relied upon or rejected by the district court”). We grant the motion to submit this appeal on the briefs and 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

Related

Scott v. United States
328 F.3d 132 (Fourth Circuit, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
698 F. App'x 134, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/john-behrmann-v-michael-goldstein-ca4-2017.