Mark E. Davis; Tammy L. Davis v. REO AMERICA, INCORPORATED, a Florida corporation

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-1091
MARK E. DAVIS; TAMMY L. DAVIS,
Plaintiffs - Appellees,
v.
REO AMERICA, INCORPORATED, a Florida corporation, and any
and all persons; REBUILD AMERICA, INCORPORATED, a Florida
Corporation,
Defendants – Appellees,
and
MIKE RUTHERFORD, Sheriff of Kanawha County; VERA MCCORMICK,
Clerk of the County Commission of Kanawha County; 100 JOHN
DOES, having or claiming any interest in real estate
identified as 51 Woodbridge Drive, Charleston, West
Virginia,
Defendants,
v.
HUNTINGTON NATIONAL BANK, N.A.,
Movant – Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Joseph R. Goodwin,
Chief District Judge. (2:09-cv-00096)
Submitted: June 1, 2010 Decided: June 7, 2010

-- 1 of 3 --

2
Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Philip Brown Hereford, HEREFORD & HEREFORD, Charleston, West
Virginia, for Appellant. Mark E. Davis, Tammy L. Davis,
Appellees Pro Se; James William Lane, Jr., Charleston, West
Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 2 of 3 --

3
PER CURIAM:
Huntington National Bank appeals from the district
court’s order denying its request for attorneys fees following
the improper removal of the underlying proceeding. Because
Huntington was not a party to the proceedings in district court,
the court acted within its discretion in denying Huntington’s
motion for attorney fees. See People for the Ethical Treatment
of Animals v. Doughney, 263 F.3d 359, 370 (4th Cir. 2001)
(providing standard of review). We have reviewed the record and
find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the
reasons stated by the district court. Davis v. Rutherford, No.
2:09-cv-00096 (S.D. W. Va. filed Oct. 6, 2009 & entered Oct. 8,
2009). We 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

-- 3 of 3 --