Timothy Davis v. Samuel I. White, P.C., No. 16-1775 (4th Cir. 2017)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-1775 TIMOTHY E. DAVIS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. SAMUEL I. WHITE, P.C.; WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., Defendants – Appellees, and UNIVERSAL COMPOSITION SERVICES, LLC; ALTAF U. KHAN, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:16-cv-00036-CMH-JFA) Submitted: March 30, 2017 Decided: April 12, 2017 Before SHEDD and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bernard E. Goodman, David Ludwig, DUNLAP BENNETT & LUDWIG, PLLC, Vienna, Virginia; Roger C. Simmons, Shawn P. Cavenee, Christopher F. deBettencourt, GORDON & SIMMONS, LLC, Frederick, Maryland, for Appellant. Mary C. Zinsner, S. Mohsin Reza, TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP, Tysons Corner, Virginia; Allison Melton, TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP, Virginia Beach, Virginia; Lisa Hudson Kim, SAMUEL I. WHITE, P.C., Virginia Beach, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Timothy E. Davis appeals from the district court’s order dismissing his amended complaint in which he raised numerous claims arising out of the foreclosure on his property. We have reviewed the record included on appeal, as well as the parties’ briefs, and find no error in the district court’s dismissal of Davis’ claims. Specifically, we find no merit to Davis’ claims asserting breach of fiduciary duty or breach of contract under Virginia law; nor do we find an actionable claim under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692 (2012). Therefore we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Davis v. Samuel I. White, P.C., No. 1:16-cv-00036-CMH-JFA (E.D. Va. June 10, 2016). 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

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.