Case Name: ARCH SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Travis HEDRICK, Defendant-Appellant, and Talley Restaurants, Inc., d/b/a Inferno, Defendant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-08-18
Citations: 612 F. App'x 681
Docket Number: No. 14-2392
Parties: ARCH SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Travis HEDRICK, Defendant-Appellant, and Talley Restaurants, Inc., d/b/a Inferno, Defendant.
Judges: Before WYNN and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 612
Pages: 681–681

Head Matter:
ARCH SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Travis HEDRICK, Defendant-Appellant, and Talley Restaurants, Inc., d/b/a Inferno, Defendant.
No. 14-2392.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 31, 2015.
Decided: Aug. 18, 2015.
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. Pinto, Pinto Coates Kyre & Bowers PLLC, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before WYNN and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
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, 2014 WL 6627039 (M.D.N.C. Nov. 21, 2014); see also Britt v. Hayes, 142 N.C.App. 190, 541 S.E.2d 761, 762 (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.