LANGLEY v. CHASE BANK USA NA, 430 Fed.Appx. 312 (5th Cir. 2011)

Kelly B. LANGLEY; Classic Clips, L.C., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. CHASE BANK USA NA, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 10-10876.United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
June 22, 2011.

[EDITOR’S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

Marc R. Stanley, Esq., Martin Woodward, Attorney, Stanley Iola, L.L.P., Dallas, TX, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.

Gordon M. Shapiro, Jackson Walker, L.L.P., Dallas, TX, Julia Strickland, David Wesley Moon, Stroock, Stroock Lavan, L.L.P., Los Angeles, CA, for DefendantAppellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dist. Ct. No. 3:10-CV-587.

Before JOLLY and HAYNES, Circuit Judges, and VANCE[*] , District Judge.

[*] Chief Judge of the Eastern District of Louisiana, sitting by designation.

PER CURIAM:[**]

[**] Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

Kelly Langley and his company, Classic Clips, individually, and on behalf of a putative

Page 313

class, sued Chase Bank for alleged breaches of the implied duty of good faith and fair dealing under Delaware law arising out of a business loan transaction. The district court granted Chase Bank’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, reasoning that the facts stated in the complaint, taker, as true, did not state a claim for breach of that duty. Having reviewed and considered the pertinent portions of the record, the parties’ briefing, and their oral arguments in light of Delaware law, we conclude that the district court made no error warranting reversal. Nemec v. Shrader, 991 A.2d 1120
(Del. 2010). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.