THOMAS H. FLUHARTY, Trustee of the Bankruptcy Estate of D. Kevin Coleman v. Quicken Loans, Inc.

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-1439
THOMAS H. FLUHARTY, Trustee of the Bankruptcy Estate of D.
Kevin Coleman and Diane M. Coleman; D. KEVIN COLEMAN; DIANE
M. COLEMAN,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
v.
QUICKEN LOANS, INC.; TITLE SOURCE, INC.; M&T BANK, Successor
by Assignment and Sub-Servicing Agreement to Defendant Bank
of America, N.A.,
Defendants – Appellees,
and
BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.,
Defendant.
-------------------------
WEST VIRGINIA BANKERS ASSOCIATION, INC.; COMMUNITY BANKERS
OF WEST VIRGINIA, INC.,
Amici Supporting Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp,
Jr., Senior District Judge. (5:13-cv-00068-FPS-JES)
Submitted: September 29, 2015 Decided: November 13, 2015
Before WILKINSON, DUNCAN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

-- 1 of 3 --

2
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Martin P. Sheehan, SHEEHAN & NUGENT, PLLC, Wheeling, West
Virginia, for Appellants. John C. Lynch, Jason Manning,
TROUTMAN SANDERS, LLP, Virginia Beach, Virginia; Carrie Goodwin
Fenwick, Joseph M. Ward, GOODWIN & GOODWIN, LLP, Charleston,
West Virginia, for Appellees. Floyd E. Boone, Jr., Sandra M.
Murphy, Stuart A. McMillan, James E. Scott, BOWLES RICE, LLP,
Charleston, West Virginia, for Amici Supporting Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 2 of 3 --

3
PER CURIAM:
Thomas H. Fluharty, the trustee in an underlying bankruptcy
proceeding, appeals from the district court’s orders: (1)
dismissing his claims brought pursuant to the West Virginia
Residential Mortgage Lender, Broker and Servicer Act, (2)
denying his motion to certify a question to the West Virginia
Supreme Court, and (3) granting summary judgment in favor of the
Defendants on his claim that the mortgage contracts at issue
were unenforceable as unconscionable under West Virginia law.
We have reviewed the record included on appeal, as well as the
parties’ briefs, and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we
affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Fluharty
v. Quicken Loans, Inc., No. 5:13-cv-00068-FPS-JES (N.D. W. Va.
Nov. 7, 2013; Feb. 19, 2014; Apr. 6, 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

-- 3 of 3 --