Tapia v. U.S. Bank, N.A. ex rel. RFMSI 2006S3

Fourth Circuit

Tapia v. U.S. Bank, N.A. ex rel. RFMSI 2006S3

441 F. App'x 166

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedAugust 1, 2011

DocketNo. 10-1856

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 441 F. App'x 166 (Tapia v. U.S. Bank, N.A. ex rel. RFMSI 2006S3) 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

Tapia v. U.S. Bank, N.A. ex rel. RFMSI 2006S3, 441 F. App'x 166 (4th Cir. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Julio and Edith Tapia appeal from the district court’s final judgment entered after the district court granted Defendants’ Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) motions to dismiss Plaintiffs’ state law claims for declaratory judgment, breach of fiduciary duty, and quiet title, as well as their claim under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C.A. §§ 1692-1692p (West 2009 & Supp.2011). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s final judgment. See Tapia v. U.S. Bank, N.A., No. 1:09-cv-01025-GBL-JFA (E.D. Va. filed June 30, 2010; entered July 1, 2010); see also Horvath v. Bank of N.Y., N.A., 641 F.3d 617 (4th Cir.2011). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:

Julio and Edith Tapia appeal from the district court’s final judgment entered after the district court granted Defendants’ Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) motions to dismiss Plaintiffs’ state law claims for declaratory judgment, breach of fiduciary duty, and quiet title, as well as their claim under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C.A. §§ 1692-1692p (West 2009 & Supp.2011). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s final judgment. See Tapia v. U.S. Bank, N.A., No. 1:09-cv-01025-GBL-JFA (E.D. Va. filed June 30, 2010; entered July 1, 2010); see also Horvath v. Bank of N.Y., N.A., 641 F.3d 617 (4th Cir.2011). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

441 F. App'x 166, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tapia-v-us-bank-na-ex-rel-rfmsi-2006s3-ca4-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack