Iris McClain v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. 18-1388 (4th Cir. 2018)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1388 IRIS MCCLAIN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.; WELLS FARGO HOME MORTGAGE, “Wells Fargo”; TIMOTHY SLOAN, President & CEO of Wells Fargo Bank, NA; JP MORGAN CHASE & COMPANY; JP MORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.; JAMES DIMON, CEO of JP Morgan Chase & Co. & JP Morgan Chase Bank, NA; BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON; GERALD HASSELL, Chairman & CEO of The Bank of New York Mellon; GOLDMAN SACHS MORTGAGE COMPANY; GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC.; LLOYD BLANKFIEN, CEO & Chairman of Goldman Sachs Mortgage Co., Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.; KRISTINE D. BROWN, Esq.; GREGORY N. BRITTO, Esq.; ROBYN A. MCQUILLEN, Esq.; WILLIAM M. SAVAGE, Esq., Managing Partner of Shapiro & Brown Alt, LLP; LILA Z. STITELY, Esq., Defendants - Appellees, and WELLS FARGO COMPANY; WELLS FARGO & COMPANY, NA; GOLDMAN SACHS; SHAPIRO BROWN & ALT, LLP, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Theodore D. Chuang, District Judge. (8:17-cv-01094-TDC) Submitted: September 20, 2018 Decided: October 4, 2018 Before NIEMEYER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Iris McClain, Appellant Pro Se. Virginia Wood Barnhart, WOMBLE BOND DICKINSON (US) LLP, Baltimore, Maryland; Bryan Gales, Baltimore, Maryland, Brett Lawrence Messinger, DUANE MORRIS, LLP, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Iris McClain appeals the district court’s order granting Defendants’ motion to dismiss her civil complaint. We have reviewed the record and perceive no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis. With the parties’ consent, we dismiss the Appellees identified in the joint stipulation. We affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. McClain v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. 8:17-cv-01094-TDC (D. Md. Mar. 8, 2018). * 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 * We find no merit to McClain’s contentions on appeal that the district court was biased against her and that the court’s determinations were tainted by a mistaken view of the facts. 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.