Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 15 views

    Robert Sayman v. Goddard & Peterson, PLLC, 4th Cir. (2015)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1) Robert W. Sayman appealed the district court's order dismissing his civil complaint against Goddard & Peterson, PLLC, Ashley Richey, Andrew J. Peterson, and Nationstar Mortgage, LLC. 2) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning for dismissing the case. 3) The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's order dismissing the case.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    Robert Sayman v. Goddard & Peterson, PLLC, 4th Cir. (2015)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    15 views2 pages
    1) Robert W. Sayman appealed the district court's order dismissing his civil complaint against Goddard & Peterson, PLLC, Ashley Richey, Andrew J. Peterson, and Nationstar Mortgage, LLC. 2) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning for dismissing the case. 3) The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's order dismissing the case.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2015-06-22 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 15-1313

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) Robert W. Sayman appealed the district court's order dismissing his civil complaint against Goddard & Peterson, PLLC, Ashley Richey, Andrew J. Peterson, and Nationstar Mortgage, LLC. 2) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning for dismissing the case. 3) The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's order dismissing the case.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    15 views2 pages

    Robert Sayman v. Goddard & Peterson, PLLC, 4th Cir. (2015)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1) Robert W. Sayman appealed the district court's order dismissing his civil complaint against Goddard & Peterson, PLLC, Ashley Richey, Andrew J. Peterson, and Nationstar Mortgage, LLC. 2) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning for dismissing the case. 3) The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's order dismissing the case.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    You are on page 1of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 15-1313

    ROBERT W. SAYMAN,
    Plaintiff Appellant,
    and
    MARY B. SAYMAN,
    Plaintiff,
    v.
    GODDARD & PETERSON, PLLC; ASHLEY RICHEY; ANDREW J. PETERSON;
    NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of North Carolina, at Charlotte.
    Frank D. Whitney,
    Chief District Judge. (3:14-cv-00426-FDW-DSC)

    Submitted:

    June 18, 2015

    Decided:

    June 22, 2015

    Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Robert W. Sayman, Appellant Pro Se. Matthew Thor McKee, ROGERS,


    TOWNSEND & THOMAS, PC, Charlotte, North Carolina; Dennis Kyle
    Deak, TROUTMAN SANDERS, LLP, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
    Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Robert

    W.

    Sayman

    appeals

    dismissing his civil complaint.


    find

    no

    reasons

    reversible
    stated

    Peterson,
    2015).
    legal
    before

    PLLC,

    by

    error.
    the

    No.

    the

    district

    courts

    order

    We have reviewed the record and


    Accordingly,

    district

    court.

    we

    affirm

    Sayman

    3:14-cv-00426-FDW-DSC

    v.

    (W.D.N.C.

    for

    the

    Goddard
    Feb.

    &

    25,

    We dispense with oral argument because the facts and


    contentions
    this

    court

    are

    adequately

    and

    argument

    presented

    would

    not

    in
    aid

    the
    the

    materials
    decisional

    process.
    AFFIRMED

    You might also like