Timothy Redmond v. Green Tree Servicing, LLC

UNPUBLISHED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Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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