The Hesses brought a declaratory judgment action against Ebbets and Harleysville Mutual Insurance Company ("Harleysville"), Long and Foster's insurance carrier. The Hesses sought to have the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia ("district court") declare that Ebbets was insured under Long and Foster's business automobile insurance policy issued through Harleysville. Harleysville filed a Motion to Dismiss, pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(6). The district court granted Harleysville's Motion to Dismiss; the Hesses appealed the matter to United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.

Pursuant to Virginia's choice of law rules, courts must apply the "law of the place where an insurance contract is written and delivered" to determine policy coverage. Buchanan v. Doe, 431 S.E.2d 289, 291 (Va. 1993). The parties agreed that Virginia law applied in construing this policy.

Like in Maryland, under Virginia law, an insurance policy is a contract and the words used must be given their ordinary meaning if they are susceptible to such a construction. Graphic Arts Mut. Ins. Co. v. C.W. Warthen Co., 397 S.E.2d 876, 877 (Va. 1990). An insurance provision is ambiguous only if it may reasonably "be understood in more than one way or when such language refers to two or more things at the same time." Salzi v. Virginia Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co., 556 S.E.2d 758, 760 (Va. 2002). "A well-settled principle of contract law dictates that where an agreement is complete on its face, is plain and unambiguous in its terms, the court is not at liberty to search for its meaning beyond the instrument itself." Ross v. Craw, 343 S.E.2d 312, 316 (Va. 1986) (internal quotation marks omitted). The Fourth Circuit, found that based on the plain language of Long and Foster's business automobile insurance policy issued through Harleysville, Ebbets was explicitly excluded as an insured under the policy.

Therefore, the Fourth Circuit held that the Hesses failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, and that the district court properly granted Harleysville's Motion to Dismiss.