Lancer Insurance Company v. David Snyder, No. 13-1463 (4th Cir. 2013)

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1463 LANCER INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff - Appellee, and VIP LIMOUSINE SERVICES, LTD.; GLEN Limousine, Ltd.; LEE JAMES CRAWFORD, M. LEE, d/b/a VIP Defendants - Appellees, v. DAVID SNYDER and MARY SNYDER, Personal Representatives of the estate of Michael C. Snyder, Defendants - Appellants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. Gina M. Groh, District Judge. (3:11-cv-00111-GMG) Submitted: August 2, 2013 Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Decided: DUNCAN, December 5, 2013 Circuit Judge, and Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. F. Samuel Byrer, Peter A. Pentony, LAW OFFICE OF F. SAMUEL BYRER, PLLC, Charles Town, West Virginia, for Appellants. Michael E. Lang, MARGOLIS EDELSTEIN, Beaver, Pennsylvania, for Appellee Lancer Insurance Company. Daniel R. Schuda, Karen E. Klein, SCHUDA & ASSOCIATES, PLLC, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellees VIP Limousine Services, Ltd., and Glen M. Lee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Lancer Insurance Company ( Lancer ) brought this declaratory judgment action against VIP Limousine Service, Ltd.; Glen M. Lee d/b/a VIP Limousine, Ltd.; and David and Mary Snyder ( the Snyders ) as personal representatives of the estate of their deceased son Michael C. Snyder ( Michael ). In its action, Lancer sought a determination that it was not required to indemnify accident that Lee Crawford occurred for when struck and killed Michael. a liability vehicle arising Crawford out was of an driving The Snyders filed a counterclaim seeking to collect on a state-court judgment they had previously obtained against Crawford based on his negligence in causing the accident. The district court granted summary judgment against the Snyders and in favor of Lancer and the other parties. See Lancer Ins. Co. v. VIP Limousine Serv., Ltd., No. 3:11-CV-111, 2013 WL 937735 (N.D. W. Va. Mar. 11, 2013). The Snyders now appeal. We have reviewed the record and have found no error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See id. 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 3