U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2015

Kenneth White v. Leroy Owens

Kenneth White v. Leroy Owens
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided October 6, 2015

Kenneth White v. Leroy Owens

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-1312

KENNETH A. WHITE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LEROY SCOTT OWENS, VP, Old Republic National Title Insurance; CHAGRIN VALLEY TITLE & ESCROW AGENCY; GENERAL TITLE & TRUST COMPANY; DOUGLAS KING, Esq.; STEPHEN D.

STEINOUR, CEO, Chairman, President, Huntington National Bank; ROGER CASALE, VP, Sky Bank (bought by Huntington Nat’l Bank in 2007); RYAN HOWARD, Mortgage Loan Originator, Sky Bank (bought by Huntington Nat’l Bank in 2007); ROBERT ROSPLOCK, Esq.; NANCY LUXENBERG; MONICA E. RUSSELL, Attorney at Law; DANIEL A. FRIEDLANDER; ROBERT H. YOUNG, Esq.; HUNTINGTON NATIONAL BANK; ONE THROUGH TWENTY JOHN & JANE DOES; OLD REPUBLIC NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE, 400 Second Avenue South, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401, and; OLD REPUBLIC NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE; TITLE HOLDINGS, LTD/CHARGIN VALLEY TITLE & ESCROW AGENCY; SKY BANK/HUNTINGTON NAT’L BANK, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Bluefield. David A. Faber, Senior District Judge. (1:12-cv-07965)

Submitted: September 30, 2015 Decided: October 6, 2015

Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kenneth A. White, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Kenneth A. White, a federal inmate, appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing, under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012), White’s second amended complaint filed in his civil action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. White v. Owens, No. 1:12-cv-07965 (S.D. W. Va. March 12, 2015). 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

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.