Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Roselli v. Universal Underwriters, 04-1694 (2005)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 04-1694 Visitors: 25
Filed: Feb. 11, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1694 NICK ROSELLI, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus UNIVERSAL UNDERWRITERS INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge. (CA-02-4097-4-25BH) Submitted: January 14, 2005 Decided: February 11, 2005 Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William F. O’Neil, I
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1694 NICK ROSELLI, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus UNIVERSAL UNDERWRITERS INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge. (CA-02-4097-4-25BH) Submitted: January 14, 2005 Decided: February 11, 2005 Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William F. O’Neil, III, O’NEIL & CHANDLER, L.L.C., Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, for Appellant. Bradford N. Martin, William S.F. Freeman, WALKER, MARTIN & REIBOLD, L.L.C., Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Nick Roselli appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to Universal Underwriters Insurance Company on Roselli’s action for insurance coverage for an accident that occurred on July 4, 2000. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Roselli v. Universal Underwriters Ins. Co., No. CA-02-4097-4-25BH (D.S.C. Apr. 30, 2004). 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 - 2 -
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer