Case Name: Haywood M. CLAYTON; Sylvia K. Clayton, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. AMERIQUEST MORTGAGE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee, and Lawrence S. Maitin; Morris, Schneider & Prior, LLC, Defendants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-12-29
Citations: 117 F. App'x 301
Docket Number: No. 04-1849
Parties: Haywood M. CLAYTON; Sylvia K. Clayton, Plaintiffs—Appellants, v. AMERIQUEST MORTGAGE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee, and Lawrence S. Maitin; Morris, Schneider & Prior, LLC, Defendants.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 117
Pages: 301–302

Head Matter:
Haywood M. CLAYTON; Sylvia K. Clayton, Plaintiffs—Appellants, v. AMERIQUEST MORTGAGE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee, and Lawrence S. Maitin; Morris, Schneider & Prior, LLC, Defendants.
No. 04-1849.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Nov. 10, 2004.
Decided Dec. 29, 2004.
Haywood M. Clayton, Sylvia K. Clayton, Appellants pro se. Dena Beth Langley, Stuart Carien Gauffreau, Nexsen Pruet Adams Kleemeier, PLLC, Greensboro, North Carolina; Angel R. Gordon, Morris, Schneider & Prior, LLC, Atlanta, Georgia, for Appellee.
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Haywood M. Clayton and Sylvia K. Clayton appeal from the district court's orders granting Ameriquest Mortgage Company's motion to enforce the settlement agreement between the parties and denying the Claytons' motion for reconsideration of that order. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Clayton v. Ameriquest Mortgage Co., No. CA-02-415-1 (M.D.N.C. Apr. 5, 2004 & filed June 18, 2004; entered June 21, 2004). In light of this disposition, we deny the Claytons' motion for a stay pending appeal. 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