John Behrmann v. Michael Goldstein
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.
Opinion
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
698 F. App'x 134, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/john-behrmann-v-michael-goldstein-ca4-2017.