Case Name: GRAYSON & KUBLI, P.C., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jeffrey P. GOLDSTEIN, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-06-11
Citations: 229 F. App'x 263
Docket Number: No. 06-1636
Parties: GRAYSON & KUBLI, P.C., Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Jeffrey P. GOLDSTEIN, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 229
Pages: 263–264

Head Matter:
GRAYSON & KUBLI, P.C., Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Jeffrey P. GOLDSTEIN, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 06-1636.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: April 20, 2007.
Decided: June 11, 2007.
Rand L. Gelber, Vienna, Virginia, for Appellant. Mary E. Harkins, Grayson & Kubli, P.C., McLean, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before WILLIAMS, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Appellant Jeffrey P. Goldstein appeals the district court's judgment that he owed legal fees under a finding of breach of contract, or, in the alternative, quantum meruit. After a bench trial, this court reviews the district court's conclusions of law de novo and its findings of fact for clear error. Minyard Enter., Inc. v. Southeastern Chem. & Solvent Co., 184 F.3d 373, 380 (4th Cir.1999); Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a). A finding of fact is clearly erroneous when, "although there is evidence to support it, the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed." United States v. United States Gypsum Co., 333 U.S. 364, 395, 68 S.Ct. 525, 92 L.Ed. 746 (1948); In re Green, 934 F.2d 568, 570 (4th Cir.1991).
We have reviewed the parties' briefs and the joint appendix and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Grayson & Kubli v. Goldstein, No. 1:04- cv-01337-LO (E.D.Va. Apr. 20, 2006). 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.