Schultz v. Encompass Ins Co , 145 F. App'x 397 ( 2005 )


Menu:
  •                                                                                                                            Opinions of the United
    2005 Decisions                                                                                                             States Court of Appeals
    for the Third Circuit
    10-17-2005
    Schultz v. Encompass Ins Co
    Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential
    Docket No. 04-3945
    Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2005
    Recommended Citation
    "Schultz v. Encompass Ins Co" (2005). 2005 Decisions. Paper 397.
    http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2005/397
    This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova
    University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2005 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova
    University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.
    NOT PRECEDENTIAL
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
    No: 04-3945
    JASON SCHULTZ,
    Appellant
    v.
    ENCOMPASS INSURANCE COMPANY
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
    (Civ. No. 03-cv-03936)
    District Judge: Hon. Juan R. Sanchez
    Submitted pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)
    Friday, September 23, 2005
    Before: ROTH, McKEE and FISHER,
    Circuit Judges
    (Opinion filed: October 17, 2005)
    OPINION
    McKEE, Circuit Judge.
    Jason Schultz was injured in an automobile accident and sought a declaratory
    judgment that he is covered under an automobile insurance policy Encompass Insurance
    issued to his grandparents, Loretta and Paul V. Schultz. Following a non-jury trial, the
    district court found that Schultz is not covered by the policy because he was not a resident
    of his grandparents’ household at the time of the accident, as required by the terms of the
    1
    policy. Accordingly, the district court entered judgment in favor of Encompass, and this
    appeal followed, and we will affirm.
    Inasmuch as the district court has set forth the factual and procedural history of
    this case, we find it unnecessary to repeat that history here. See Schultz v. Encompass
    Insurance, 
    2004 WL 2075114
     (E.D. Pa. Sept. 16, 2004). Moreover, in his thoughtful
    Memorandum and Opinion, Judge Sanchez has carefully and completely explained his
    reasons for finding that Schultz is not covered under his grandparents’ policy. We can
    add little to Judge Sanchez’ searching analysis, and the arguments raised on appeal do not
    merit further discussion.
    Accordingly, we will affirm the district court substantially for the reasons set forth
    in the district court’s Memorandum and Order without further discussion.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 04-3945

Citation Numbers: 145 F. App'x 397

Filed Date: 10/17/2005

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/12/2023