Lanier v. Branch Banking & Trust Co., 072412 FED4, 12-1441

Docket Nº:12-1441
Opinion Judge:PER CURIAM:
Party Name:CATHY G. LANIER; RANDY D. LANIER, Plaintiffs - Appellants, v. BRANCH BANKING & TRUST COMPANY; BAYVIEW LOAN SERVICING, LLC; FLEMING & WHITT PA; MCDONNELL & ASSOCIATES PA; DOES 1-10, inclusive, Defendants-Appellees.
Attorney:Cathy G. Lanier, Randy D. Lanier, Appellants Pro Se. Steven Barry Licata, Columbia, South Carolina; David Randolph Whitt, FLEMING & WHITT, P.A., Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Judge Panel:Before MOTZ, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Case Date:July 24, 2012
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

CATHY G. LANIER; RANDY D. LANIER, Plaintiffs - Appellants,

v.

BRANCH BANKING & TRUST COMPANY; BAYVIEW LOAN SERVICING, LLC; FLEMING & WHITT PA; MCDONNELL & ASSOCIATES PA; DOES 1-10, inclusive, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 12-1441

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

July 24, 2012

UNPUBLISHED

Submitted: July 10, 2012.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Margaret B. Seymour, Chief District Judge. (3:12-cv-00628-MBS-SVH).

Cathy G. Lanier, Randy D. Lanier, Appellants Pro Se.

Steven Barry Licata, Columbia, South Carolina; David Randolph Whitt, FLEMING & WHITT, P.A., Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Before MOTZ, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed in part; affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Cathy G. Lanier and Randy D. Lanier appeal the district court's order denying the motion for a temporary restraining order that they filed in connection with their action against the Appellees.

To the extent that the Laniers seek to appeal the district court's denial of a temporary restraining order, the denial is not appealable on the circumstances of this case. See Virginia v. Tenneco, Inc., 538 F.2d 1026, 1029-30 (4th Cir. 1976). To the extent that the Laniers also sought a preliminary injunction, we have reviewed the record and conclude that...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP