Case ID: br_350/html/0279-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

In re HOWARD DELIVERY SERVICE, INCORPORATED, Debtor. Howard Delivery Service, Incorporated, Debtor-Appellee, v. Zurich American Insurance Company, Movant-Appellant. American Home Assurance Company; Hartford Fire Insurance Company; The Travelers Indemnity Company, Amici Supporting Appellant.
    No. 04-1136.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Argued: Oct. 28, 2004.
    Decided: March 24, 2005.
    Decided on Remand: Sept. 29, 2006.
    ARGUED: Margaret Mary Anderson, Lord, Bissell & Brook, Chicago, Illinois, for Appellant. Richard McMaster Francis, Bowles, Rice, Mcdavid, Graff & Love, P.L.L.C., Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee. G. Erie Brunstad, Jr., Bingham McCutchen, L.L.P. for Amici Supporting Appellant. ON BRIEF: Hugh S. Balsam, Timothy S. McFadden, Lord, Bissell & Brook, Chicago, Illinois, for Appellant. Heather G. Harlan, Bowles, Rice, Mcdavid, Graff & Love, P.L.L.C., Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before NIEMEYER, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
   Affirmed and remanded by published per curiam opinion.

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

In our opinion dated March 24, 2005, we held that Zurich American’s claim for unpaid workers’ compensation insurance premiums was entitled to priority under 11 U.S.C. § 507(a)(4). See Howard Delivery Serv., Inc. v. Zurich Am. Ins. Co. (In re Howard Delivery Serv., Inc.), 403 F.3d 228 (4th Cir.2005). The Supreme Court reversed our judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with its opinion. Howard Delivery Serv., Inc. v. Zurich Am. Ins. Co., — U.S. —, 126 S.Ct. 2105, 165 L.Ed.2d 110 (2006). For the reasons given by the Supreme Court, we now affirm the judgment of the district court denying priority under 11 U.S.C. § 507(a)(4) for Zurich American’s claim for unpaid workers’ compensation insurance premiums. See also Howard Delivery Serv., 403 F.3d at 241 (Niemeyer, J., dissenting). The case is remanded for further proceedings.

AFFIRMED AND REMANDED.