Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company v. B. Diane Tamariz-Wallace, No. 16-1405 (4th Cir. 2017)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-1405 NATIONWIDE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff/Counter Defendant – Appellee, v. B. DIANE TAMARIZ-WALLACE, Defendant/Counter Claimant – Appellant, and DIANE TAMARIZ & ASSOCIATES, P.A.; MORAN INSURANCE SERVICES, INC.; GEORGE T. MORAN, INC.; C. DAVID WALLACE, Defendants, and NATIONWIDE BANK; CORRIGAN INSURANCE, INC.; WILLIAM P. CORRIGAN, JR.; C.W. HAYES, III; CHARLENE E. HARDEE; SAMUEL BRADSHAW, IV; JOHN PAUL PURSSORD, Counter Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Senior District Judge. (1:09-cv-00667-JFM) Submitted: January 27, 2017 Before SHEDD and Circuit Judge. AGEE, Circuit Decided: Judges, and February 16, 2017 HAMILTON, Senior Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Matthew S. Grimsley, CARYN GROEDEL & ASSOCIATES CO., LPA, Cleveland, Ohio; John Singleton, SINGLETON LAW GROUP, PA, Lutherville, Maryland, for Appellant. Quintin F. Lindsmith, James P. Schuck, BRICKER & ECKLER, LLP, Columbus, Ohio; Patricia McHugh Lambert, PESSIN KATZ LAW, P.A., Towson, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: B. Diane Tamariz-Wallace appeals from the district court’s order denying her motion to reopen the lawsuit between her and Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co., which was administratively closed after Tamariz-Wallace filed her petition for relief in bankruptcy. We have reviewed the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal and find no reversible error. the district court’s order. Accordingly, we affirm See Providence Hall Assoc. Ltd. P’ship v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 816 F.3d 273 (4th Cir. 2016). We dispense contentions with are oral argument adequately because presented in the facts and the materials legal before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.