Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Helen Singletary v. Beazley Insurance Company, Inc., 14-1058 (2014)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 14-1058 Visitors: 10
Filed: Nov. 12, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1058 HELEN SINGLETARY; FAMILY ASSISTANCE MANAGEMENT SERVICES, Plaintiffs - Appellants, v. BEAZLEY INSURANCE COMPANY, INC., Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. David C. Norton, District Judge. (2:13-cv-01142-DCN) Submitted: October 27, 2014 Decided: November 12, 2014 Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1058 HELEN SINGLETARY; FAMILY ASSISTANCE MANAGEMENT SERVICES, Plaintiffs - Appellants, v. BEAZLEY INSURANCE COMPANY, INC., Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. David C. Norton, District Judge. (2:13-cv-01142-DCN) Submitted: October 27, 2014 Decided: November 12, 2014 Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. George J. Kefalos, Oana D. Johnson, GEORGE J. KEFALOS, PA, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellants. Clayton B. McCullough, MCCULLOUGH KHAN, LLC, Charleston, South Carolina; Marc E. Rindner, Jason A. O’Brien, WILEY REIN LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Helen Singletary and Family Assistance Management Services appeal the district court’s orders granting summary judgment in favor of Beazley Insurance Company, Inc. and denying their motion to alter or amend the judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) in their civil action claiming breach of an insurance policy for failure to pay and bad faith refusal to pay. We have reviewed the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Singletary v. Beazley Ins. Co., Inc., No. 2:13-cv-01142-DCN (D.S.C. Nov. 5, 2013; Dec. 30, 2013). 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 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