The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
02-2031•G. Mark Seals v. GENERAL REVENUE CORPORATION (GRC), an Ohio corporation
02-2031Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitDec 23, 2002
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-2031
G. MARK SEALS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
GENERAL REVENUE CORPORATION (GRC), an Ohio
corporation; NATIONAL ENTERPRISE SYSTEMS
(NES), an Ohio corporation,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr.,
District Judge. (CA-01-118-5)
Submitted: December 9, 2002 Decided: December 23, 2002
Before WILKINS, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
G. Mark Seals, Appellant Pro Se. Kevin Todd Dreyer, GENERAL REVENUE
CORPORATION, Cincinnati, Ohio; Paul Thomas Farell, Huntington, West
Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
G. Mark Seals appeals the dismissal of his civil action
alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, see
15 § U.S.C. §§ 1692-1692o (2000) (FDCPA), and the West Virginia
Consumer Credit Protection Act, see W. Va. Code § 46A-2-125 (1999)
(WVCCPA). We have reviewed the district court’s memorandum opinion
and order adopting the magistrate judge’s report and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by
the district court. See Seals v. General Revenue Corp., No. CA-01-
118-5 (N.D.W. Va. Aug. 19, 2002). Additionally, we deny Seals’
motion to correct his complaint as moot and dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
presented in the materials before the court and argument would not
aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.