Juan Cervantes v. Bridgefield Casualty Insurance, No. 16-1263 (4th Cir. 2016)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-1263 JUAN R. CERVANTES, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. BRIDGEFIELD CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant - Appellee. No. 16-1324 JUAN R. CERVANTES, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. BRIDGEFIELD CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Joe L. Webster, Magistrate Judge. (1:15-cv-00081-JLW) Submitted: November 29, 2016 Decided: December 6, 2016 Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. J. David Stradley, WHITE & STRADLEY, Carolina; Brian M. Ricci, RICCI LAW FIRM, Carolina, for Appellant/Cross-Appellee. MCANGUS, GOUDELOCK & COURIE, Raleigh, Appellee/Cross-Appellant. PLLC, Raleigh, North PA, Greenville, North Jessica C. Tyndall, North Carolina, for Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Juan R. Cervantes appeals the district court’s order dismissing his complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Fed. Insurance R. Civ. Company P. 12(b)(1), and (“Bridgefield”) Bridgefield cross-appeals Casualty from the district court’s orders denying Bridgefield’s motions to stay discovery and for a protective order, and granting, in part, Cervantes’ motions to compel and for sanctions. Cervantes’ appeal, reversible we error. have We reviewed agree with the the With respect to record and district find court no that “persuasive data” does not exist convincing us that the North Carolina Supreme Court would disagree with the decisions of the North Carolina Court of Appeals relied on by the district court. See Assicurazioni Generali, 1002-03 (4th Cir. 1998). S.p.A. v. Neil, 160 F.3d 997, Accordingly, we affirm the dismissal of Cervantes’ complaint substantially for the reasons stated by the district court. Cervantes v. Bridgefield Cas. Ins. Co., No. 1:15-cv-00081-JLW (M.D.N.C. Feb. 11, 2016). the district court’s dismissal of Because we affirm Cervantes’ dismiss Bridgefield’s cross-appeal as moot. oral argument adequately because presented in the the facts and materials legal before complaint, we We dispense with contentions this court are 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.