Timothy Redmond v. Green Tree Servicing, LLC ( 2015 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-1618
TIMOTHY REDMOND; COLLEEN REDMOND,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
v.
GREEN TREE SERVICING, LLC,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (7:12-cv-00258-BO)
Submitted: January 23, 2015 Decided: February 2, 2015
Before SHEDD and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Aaron D. Radbil, GREENWALD DAVIDSON PLLC, Boca Raton, Florida,
for Appellants. Robert R. Marcus, Heather C. White, SMITH MOORE
LEATHERWOOD LLP, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Appellants Timothy Redmond and Colleen Redmond appeal
the district court’s orders granting summary judgment to the
Defendant and denying reconsideration in their civil action. On
appeal, they contend that the district court erred in holding
that only “consumers” have standing to bring a claim under the
North Carolina Debt Collection Act and in finding that they are
not consumers as defined in the Act. We affirm.
We review whether a district court erred in granting
summary judgment de novo, applying the same legal standards as
the district court and viewing the evidence in the light most
favorable to the nonmoving party. Walker v. Mod-U-Kraf Homes,
LLC, __ F.3d __, 2014 WL 7273031, *3 (4th Cir. Dec. 23, 2014).
The district court must enter summary judgment “against a party
who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the
existence of an element essential to that party’s case, and on
which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial.”
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322 (1986).
“Where the record taken as a whole could not lead a
rational trier of fact to find for the non-moving party, there
is no genuine issue for trial.” Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v.
Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 587 (1986) (citation and
internal quotation marks omitted). “The nonmoving party cannot
create a genuine issue of material fact through mere speculation
2
or the building of one inference upon another,” Othentec Ltd. v.
Phelan, 526 F.3d 135, 140 (4th Cir. 2008) (citation and internal
quotation marks omitted), and he cannot defeat summary judgment
with merely a scintilla of evidence, Am. Arms Int’l v. Herbert,
563 F.3d 78, 82 (4th Cir. 2009). Rather, he “must produce some
evidence (more than a scintilla) upon which a jury could
properly proceed to find a verdict for the party producing it,
upon whom the onus of proof is imposed.” Othentec Ltd., 526
F.3d at 140 (citations and internal quotation marks omitted).
We have reviewed the record and the parties’ briefs,
and we conclude that the district court did not err in granting
summary judgment to the Defendant and denying reconsideration.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. See Redmond v. Green Tree Servicing, LLC, No. 7:12-cv-
00258-BO (E.D.N.C. Mar. 27, 2014; Apr. 3, 2014; June 10, 2014);
see also Ross v. FDIC, 625 F.3d 808 (4th Cir. 2010); Green Tree
Servicing LLC v. Locklear, 763 S.E.2d 523 (N.C. Ct. App. 2014).
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
3