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)
16-1504•Janice Wolk Grenadier v. BWW LAW GROUP, LLC, f/k/a Bierman, Geesing, Ward & Wood, LLC
16-1504Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitNov 22, 2016
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-1504
JANICE WOLK GRENADIER,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
BWW LAW GROUP, LLC, f/k/a Bierman, Geesing, Ward & Wood,
LLC; HOWARD N. BIERMAN; EQUITY TRUSTEES, LLC; MARK R.
GALBRAITH; WELLS FARGO; BANK OF AMERICA, f/k/a LaSalle Bank
N.A., as successor-in-interest, Jointly and Severally, in
their Official and Personal Capacities; OCWEN LOAN
SERVICING, LLC, Jointly and Severally, in their Official
and Personal Capacities,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema,
District Judge. (1:14-cv-00827-LMB-TCB)
Submitted: November 14, 2016 Decided: November 22, 2016
Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON,
Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Janice Wolk Grenadier, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Ryan Michael,
BWW LAW GROUP, LLC, Richmond, Virginia; Syed Mohsin Reza, Mary
Catherine Zinsner, TROUTMAN SANDERS, LLP, Tysons Corner,
-- 1 of 3 --
2
Virginia; Nathaniel Patrick Lee, MCGUIREWOODS, LLP, Tysons
Corner, Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 2 of 3 --
3
PER CURIAM:
Janice Wolk Grenadier appeals the district court’s order
declining to take action on her motion for reconsideration. We
have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. Grenadier v. BWW Law Group, No. 1:14-cv-00827-LMB-TCB
(E.D. Va. Apr. 5, 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 of 3 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.