Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
JOHN R. BEHRMANN, as individual and assignee of all individuals listed on Second Amended Complaint filed on 1/22/2016 (Doc No. 133); NANCY P. BEHRMANN, as individual and assignee of all individuals listed on Second Amended Complaint filed on 1/22/2016 (Doc No. 133), Plaintiffs - Appellants, v. MICHAEL GOLDSTEIN, an individual; CHRISTIE KENNETT, an individual; JOHN T. HOUK, II, an individual; MIRIAM M. HOUK, an individual; JOHN T. HOUK, III, an individual; JANET H. RIDGELY, an individual; JULIE L. HOUK, an individual; DOES, 1-10 inclusive; ROBERT BEN KORI & ASSOCIATES, corporate form unknown; CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT PROGRAM INC., a corporation; CHARITY ADMIN, INC., a corporation; STELLAR ADVISORS, INC., a corporation; STELLAR FINANCIAL INC., a corporation; STELLAR TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS, LLC, a limited liability company; STELLAR MCKIM, LLC, a limited liability company; MCKIM CAPITAL, a corporation; DANA C. FENTON, an individual; TODD THIBODEAUX, an individual; JOHNATHAN M. GILL; JULIA WELTMANN, an individual; ROBERT H. TAGGART, Jr., an individual; HUSCH BLACKWELL LLP, a Missouri Limited Liability Partnership, Defendants - Appellees.
John R. Behrmann and Nancy Behrmann, individually and as assignees of 38 individuals listed in their second amended complaint, appeal from the district court's order granting the Defendants' motions to dismiss and dismissing their complaint. We have reviewed the record and the parties' arguments on appeal, and we find no reversible error. To the extent that any of their claims are not barred by collateral estoppel, they were filed beyond the applicable statute of limitations. Accordingly, we affirm. See Scott v. United States, 328 F.3d 132, 137 (4th Cir. 2003) (providing that appeals court may “affirm on any ground appearing in the record, including theories not relied upon or rejected by the district court”). We grant the motion to submit this appeal on the briefs and 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
PER CURIAM:
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 17-1102
Decided: October 04, 2017
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)