Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-14-02392/USCOURTS-ca4-14-02392-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Arch Specialty Insurance Company
Appellee
Travis Hedrick
Appellant
Talley Restaurants, Inc.

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-2392

ARCH SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

TRAVIS HEDRICK,

Defendant – Appellant,

and

TALLEY RESTAURANTS, INC., d/b/a Inferno,

Defendant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle 

District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Thomas D. Schroeder, 

District Judge. (1:13-cv-00621-TDS-JLW)

Submitted: July 31, 2015 Decided: August 18, 2015

Before WYNN and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gary K. Sue, Stephanie W. Anderson, BURTON, SUE & ANDERSON, 

L.L.P., Greensboro, North Carolina; Douglas S. Harris, 

Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellant. Steven G. Janik, 

Crystal L. Maluchnik, JANIK L.L.P., Cleveland, Ohio; Lovic A. 

Brooks, III, JANIK L.L.P., Columbia, South Carolina; Richard L. 

Appeal: 14-2392 Doc: 29 Filed: 08/18/2015 Pg: 1 of 3
2

Pinto, PINTO COATES KYRE & BOWERS PLLC, Greensboro, North 

Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-2392 Doc: 29 Filed: 08/18/2015 Pg: 2 of 3
3

PER CURIAM:

Travis Hedrick appeals the district court’s order granting 

summary judgment to Arch Specialty Insurance Company in this 

insurance case. 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. Arch 

Specialty Ins. Co. v. Hedrick, No. 1:13-cv-00621-TDS-JLW 

(M.D.N.C. Nov. 21, 2014); see also Britt v. Hayes, 541 S.E.2d 

761, 762 (N.C. Ct. App. 2001) (holding that claims of battery 

and negligence are compatible). 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

Appeal: 14-2392 Doc: 29 Filed: 08/18/2015 Pg: 3 of 3