Scottsdale Insurance Company v. Children's Home Society of NC, No. 13-1953 (4th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1953 SCOTTSDALE INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. CHILDREN S HOME SOCIETY OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC., Defendant Appellant, and RONALD E. FORD, SR., Administrator of the Estate of S.P., Defendant. No. 13-1954 SCOTTSDALE INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. RONALD E. FORD, SR., Administrator of the Estate of S.P, Defendant Appellant, and CHILDREN S HOME SOCIETY OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC., Defendant. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:12-cv-00081-FL) Submitted: July 31, 2014 Decided: August 20, 2014 Before MOTZ and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. R. Thompson Wright, Joseph R. Beatty, HILL EVANS JORDAN & BEATTY, PLLC, Greensboro, North Carolina; Jerome P. Trehy, Jr., JEROME P. TREHY, JR., P.A., Bahama, North Carolina; Jesse H. Rigsby, IV, TWIGGS, STRICKLAND & RABENAU, P.A., Durham, North Carolina, for Appellants. Kevin M. O Brien, Robert M. Kennedy, Jr., PHELPS DUNBAR, LLP, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Children s Home Society Of North Carolina, Inc., and Ronald Ford, Sr., the administrator of the Estate of S.P., appeal from the district court s order granting summary judgment in favor of Scottsdale Insurance Company on its declaratory judgment action seeking to limit its liability with respect to damages in the underlying wrongful death action. We have reviewed the record included on appeal, as well as the parties briefs, and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Co. v. Children s Home Society of North Scottsdale Ins. Carolina, Inc.; Scottsdale Ins. Co. v. Ford, No. 5:12-cv-00081-FL (E.D.N.C. July 3, 2014). In light of this disposition, we deny Scottsdale s motion to dismiss filed in No. 13-1954. 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
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
