Case Name: NATIONAL GRANGE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellee, and WOW, Incorporated, t/a Insurance Center of Williamsburg; Deborah Bresnaham, Third Party Defendants-Appellees, v. Richard Lynwood CHISMAN, a/k/a Bay; Joyce Ann Chisman, Defendants-Appellants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-01-08
Citations: 1 F. App'x 135
Docket Number: No. 00-1334
Parties: NATIONAL GRANGE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellee, and WOW, Incorporated, t/a Insurance Center of Williamsburg; Deborah Bresna-ham, Third Party Defendants-Appel-lees, v. Richard Lynwood CHISMAN, a/k/a Bay; Joyce Ann Chisman, Defendants-Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 1
Pages: 135–135

Head Matter:
NATIONAL GRANGE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellee, and WOW, Incorporated, t/a Insurance Center of Williamsburg; Deborah Bresna-ham, Third Party Defendants-Appel-lees, v. Richard Lynwood CHISMAN, a/k/a Bay; Joyce Ann Chisman, Defendants-Appellants.
No. 00-1334.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 20, 2000.
Decided Jan. 8, 2001.
Kenneth L. Roberts, Roberts & Roberts, P.C., Newport News, VA, for appellants. Robert Tayloe Ross, Michael L. Rigsby, Midkiff Muncie & Ross, P.C., Douglas M. Palais, McCandlish, Kane & Grant, Richmond, VA, for appellees.
Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Richard Lynwood Chisman and Joyce Ann Chisman appeal from the district court's order granting summary judgment in favor of the Appellees in this action in which National Grange Mutual Insurance Company sought a declaration that the insurance policy it issued to the Chismans was void. We have reviewed the parties' briefs, the joint appendix, the supplemental joint appendix, and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. National Grange Mut. Ins. Co. v. Chisman, No. CA-99-362-3 (E.D.Va. Feb. 14, 2000). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.