UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-1970
CECIL D. B. KING, JR.; CECILIA KING GANTT; CHARLENE KING
PERDUE; GINA BEATE CERA KING; MURIEL KING DE'TOLES; CHRISTA
KING; MATHIAS AHRENS; CYRIL D. B. KING,
Plaintiffs – Appellants,
v.
THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON,
Defendant – Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Anthony J. Trenga,
District Judge. (1:12-cv-01230-AJT-TCB)
Argued: September 16, 2014 Decided: November 6, 2014
Before NIEMEYER, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
ARGUED: W. Scott Greco, GRECO & GRECO, PC, McLean, Virginia, for
Appellants. Amy Elizabeth Miller, MCGUIREWOODS LLP, Tysons
Corner, Virginia, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Frederick D. Greco,
GRECO & GRECO, PC, McLean, Virginia, for Appellants. John D.
Wilburn, Stephen P. Mulligan, Anastasia P. Cordova, MCGUIREWOODS
LLP, Tysons Corner, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
PER CURIAM:
Cecil D.B. King, Jr. and his siblings (“Plaintiffs”) appeal
the district court’s order denying their motion for summary
judgment and granting summary judgment to defendant The Bank of
New York Mellon. Plaintiffs advanced several theories arguing
that The Bank of New York Mellon owes them more than $5,000,000
related to discharged certificates of deposit (“CDs”) that they
currently possess. Finding no reversible error, we affirm the
district court’s grant of summary judgment.
We review a district court’s grant of summary judgment de
novo. Glynn v. EDO Corp., 710 F.3d 209, 213 (4th Cir. 2013).
And though we view the facts in the light most favorable to the
nonmoving party, “[o]nly disputes over facts that might affect
the outcome of the suit under the governing law will properly
preclude the entry of summary judgment.” Anderson v. Liberty
Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986). “Conclusory or
speculative allegations do not suffice, nor does a mere
scintilla of evidence in support of [the nonmoving party’s]
case.” Thompson v. Potomac Elec. Power Co., 312 F.3d 645, 649
(4th Cir. 2002) (internal quotation marks omitted).
When their father died in 1998, Plaintiffs found five CDs
in a box of cancelled checks in his apartment. King v. Bank of
New York Mellon Corp., NB, 957 F. Supp. 2d 680, 681–82 (E.D. Va.
2013). First National Bank of Chicago issued the CDs in 1976.
3
Id. at 681. The five CDs were made payable to “Bearer,” each
with a face value of $1,000,000. Id. The CDs matured on July
28, 1977, with a full value of $5,329,513.90, representing both
principal and 6.5% interest. Id. On July 28, 1977, Morgan
Guaranty Trust Company of New York, acting as First National
Bank of Chicago’s agent, paid Irving Trust Company, which then
physically possessed the CDs, their full value. Id.
The Bank of New York Mellon is Irving Trust Company’s
successor in interest. Plaintiffs advanced several theories
alleging that The Bank of New York Mellon owes them the CDs’
full value plus interest that would have accrued since 1977.
Upon careful review of the voluminous record, we must agree with
the district court that Plaintiffs, as holders of discharged
bearer instruments, have not made a successful claim against The
Bank of New York Mellon, which has been discharged from all
liability on the CDs. Id. at 684–88; see also N.Y. U.C.C. §§ 3-
601(3)(b) & 3-603.
Under N.Y. U.C.C. § 3-603, “[t]he liability of any party is
discharged to the extent of his payment or satisfaction to the
holder . . . .” Here, Morgan Guaranty Trust Company of New York
paid the full value of the CDs to Irving Trust Company, which
was undisputedly at that time the “holder” because it physically
possessed the CDs. King, 957 F. Supp. 2d at 681. This payment
4
discharged “all parties” under N.Y. U.C.C. § 3-601. * Further, as
to their claims sounding in contract, quasi-contract, and
fiduciary relationship, Plaintiffs have provided no evidence to
support their allegations.
In sum, we affirm the district court’s entry of summary
judgment in favor of The Bank of New York Mellon.
AFFIRMED
*
This discharge renders moot Plaintiffs’ indorsement-in-
blank theory relating to the Irving Trust Company stamp on the
back of the CDs. Even assuming a valid indorsement in blank,
the payment discharged the Irving Trust Company and its
successor in interest, The Bank of New York Mellon, from all
liability on the CDs. See N.Y. U.C.C. §§ 3-601(3)(b) & 3-603.
5