Summary
providing that the FDCPA "distinguishes a 'debt collector,' which collects the debts due to another, from a 'creditor,' which seeks to collect on its own debts
Summary of this case from Bruce v. Pentagon Fed. Credit UnionOpinion
No. 17-1538
10-23-2017
FREDICIA HARDNETT; WILBERT A. HARDNETT, Plaintiffs - Appellants, v. M & T BANK; ATLANTIC LAW GROUP; JOHN DOE 1-10; JANE DOE 1-10, Defendants - Appellees.
Fredicia Hardnett, Wilbert A. Hardnett, Appellants Pro Se. Robert Miltz Luck, III, REED SMITH, LLP, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
UNPUBLISHED
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. M. Hannah Lauck, District Judge. (3:15-cv-00622-MHL) Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Fredicia Hardnett, Wilbert A. Hardnett, Appellants Pro Se. Robert Miltz Luck, III, REED SMITH, LLP, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Fredicia Hardnett and Wilbert A. Hardnett appeal the district court's order dismissing their suit and denying their motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Hardnett v. M&T Bank, No. 3:15-cv-00622-MHL (E.D. Va. Aug. 31 & Sept. 19, 2016; Apr. 13, 2017). 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