Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Chia v. Wells Fargo Bank NA, 4th Cir. (2010)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views3 pages
    This document summarizes a court case in which Dolores Chia appealed the district court's denial of her motion to amend her complaint against Wells Fargo Bank and others related to the refinancing and foreclosure of her mortgage. The appeals court affirmed the district court's ruling that, following Chia's bankruptcy discharge, she lacked standing to bring claims arising from the mortgage transactions. The appeals court granted Chia's motion to amend her reply brief but still ruled in favor of Wells Fargo and the other defendants.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2010-03-19 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 092018

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document summarizes a court case in which Dolores Chia appealed the district court's denial of her motion to amend her complaint against Wells Fargo Bank and others related to the refinancing and foreclosure of her mortgage. The appeals court affirmed the district court's ruling that, following Chia's bankruptcy discharge, she lacked standing to bring claims arising from the mortgage transactions. The appeals court granted Chia's motion to amend her reply brief but still ruled in favor of Wells Fargo and the other defendants.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    6 views3 pages

    Chia v. Wells Fargo Bank NA, 4th Cir. (2010)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a court case in which Dolores Chia appealed the district court's denial of her motion to amend her complaint against Wells Fargo Bank and others related to the refinancing and foreclosure of her mortgage. The appeals court affirmed the district court's ruling that, following Chia's bankruptcy discharge, she lacked standing to bring claims arising from the mortgage transactions. The appeals court granted Chia's motion to amend her reply brief but still ruled in favor of Wells Fargo and the other defendants.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 09-2018

    DOLORES L. CHIA,
    Plaintiff Appellant,
    v.
    WELLS FARGO BANK NA, as servicer for U.S. Bank National
    Association, as trustee for Structural Asset Securities
    Corporation Trust 2005-WF3; U.S. NATIONAL BANK ASSOCIATION;
    WELLS FARGO BANK NA, exclusive and inclusive of its
    subsidiaries including: Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Premier
    Asset Services, Wells Fargo Asset Corporation; RICHARD A.
    SMISSEN; MICHAEL V. SMISSEN; KATHRYN SMISSEN WYN; SCOTT M.
    WHEATLEY, as an individual and as the CEO of Jabez Mortgage
    Group, LLC, Executive Settlement Services, Wheatley Law
    Firm, TitleSolve; LA-Z-BOY, INC.; SAMUEL I. WHITE; J. DOES
    1-50, XXXCORPORATIONS 1-50,
    Defendants Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria.
    Leonie M. Brinkema,
    District Judge. (1:09-cv-00670-LMB-TRJ)

    Submitted:

    March 16, 2010

    Decided:

    Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    March 19, 2010

    Delores L. Chia, Appellant Pro Se.


    Vienna, Virginia, for Appellees.

    Elizabeth Shattuck Finberg,

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Dolores

    L.

    Chia

    appeals

    from

    the

    district

    courts

    order denying her motion to amend her complaint and determining


    that, following her discharge in bankruptcy, she lacked standing
    to bring claims against Wells Fargo Bank, NA, arising out of the
    refinance of her mortgage and the subsequent foreclosure sale of
    her home.
    error.

    We have reviewed the record and find no reversible

    Accordingly, although we grant Chias motion for leave

    to file an amended reply brief, we affirm for the reasons stated


    by the district court.

    Chia v. Wells Fargo Bank NA, No. 1:09-

    cv-00670-LMB-TRJ (E.D. Va. Aug. 3 & 5, 2009).

    We dispense with

    oral

    contentions

    argument

    adequately

    because

    presented

    in

    the
    the

    facts

    and

    materials

    legal
    before

    the

    court

    are
    and

    argument would not aid the decisional process.


    AFFIRMED

    You might also like