Matthews v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
This text of 536 F. App'x 384 (Matthews v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.) 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
[385]*385Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Lucristia A. Matthews appeals the district court’s order granting Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.’s motion to dismiss her claims alleging violation of the Maryland Consumer Protection Act, and for common law fraud, promissory estoppel, negligence, neghgent misrepresentation, and breach of an implied-in-fact contract. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. See Matthews v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. 1:12-cv-01024-MJG, 2012 WL 3903453 (D.Md. Sept. 6, 2012); see also Spaulding v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 714 F.3d 769 (4th Cir.2013). 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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
536 F. App'x 384, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matthews-v-wells-fargo-bank-na-ca4-2013.