Demetrice Douglas v. Charles Veney ( 2011 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-1586
PROTECTIVE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Tennessee corporation,
Plaintiff,
v.
DEMETRICE E. DOUGLAS,
Defendant – Appellee,
v.
CHARLES H. VENEY; LEVERNIA HALL,
Defendants - Appellants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. M. Hannah Lauck, Magistrate
Judge. (3:10-cv-00542-MHL)
Submitted: December 20, 2011 Decided: December 22, 2011
Before MOTZ, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Janipher W. Robinson, ROBINSON & GREENE, Richmond, Virginia, for
Appellant. A. Davis Bugg, Jr., RUMSEY & BUGG, P.C., Irvington,
Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Appellants appeal the magistrate judge’s * order denying
their summary judgment motion and granting Appellee’s summary
judgment motion on Appellants’ claims seeking recovery of life
insurance proceeds. Limiting our review to the issues raised in
Appellants’ opening brief, see IGEN Int’l, Inc. v. Roche
Diagnostics GmbH, 335 F.3d 303, 308 (4th Cir. 2003); Edwards v.
City of Goldsboro, 178 F.3d 231, 241 n. 6 (4th Cir. 1999), we
have found no reversible error and affirm the magistrate judge’s
order. See Douglas v. Veney, No. 3:10-cv-00542-MHL (E.D. Va.
April 29, 2011). 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
*
The parties consented to the jurisdiction of the
magistrate judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2006).
2