Case Name: PUGLIA MARINE, INCORPORATED, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. TRINITY YACHTS, Defendant-Appellee, and Halter Marine, Incorporated, Defendant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-11-19
Citations: 112 F. App'x 933
Docket Number: No. 04-1353
Parties: PUGLIA MARINE, INCORPORATED, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. TRINITY YACHTS, Defendant—Appellee, and Halter Marine, Incorporated, Defendant.
Judges: Before WILKINSON and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and CONRAD, United States District Judge for the Western District of Virginia, sitting by designation.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 112
Pages: 933–934

Head Matter:
PUGLIA MARINE, INCORPORATED, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. TRINITY YACHTS, Defendant—Appellee, and Halter Marine, Incorporated, Defendant.
No. 04-1353.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Argued Oct. 28, 2004.
Decided Nov. 19, 2004.
ARGUED: Keith Moss Babcock, Lewis, Babcock & Hawkins, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant. Stewart Foster Peck, Lugenbuhl, Wheaton, Peck, Rankin & Hubbard, New Orleans, Louisiana, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Robert Monroe Erwin, Jr., Greenwood, South Carolina; Arthur Camden Lewis, Lewis, Babcock & Hawkins, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant. Richard S. Rosen, Mice F. Paylor, Rosen, Rosen & Hagood, Charleston, South Carolina; Kristopher M. Redmann, David B. Sharpe, Lugenbuhl, Wheaton, Peck, Rankin & Hubbard, New Orleans, Louisiana, for Appellee.
Before WILKINSON and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and CONRAD, United States District Judge for the Western District of Virginia, sitting by designation.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
This case arises from a dispute over the insurance proceeds paid on a yacht that was destroyed by a fire. Puglia Marine appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment to Trinity Yachts on Puglia Marine's claims for unjust enrichment, promissory estoppel, and breach of contract.
We review the granting of summary judgment de novo. We have reviewed the record, briefs, and applicable case law on this matter, and we have had the benefit of oral argument. Our careful review persuades us that the rulings of the district court were correct. Accordingly, we affirm the judgments in favor of Trinity Yachts on the reasoning of the district court. See Puglia Marine Dev., Inc. v. Halter Marine, Inc. & Trinity Yachts, C.A. No. 4:00-3949-22 (D.S.C. March 31, 2003 and Feb. 17, 2004).
AFFIRMED