Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

91-2737 (1992)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 91-2737 Visitors: 4
Filed: Apr. 30, 1992
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 961 F.2d 211 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Rebekah HINDS, Individually, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Gregory W. Hinds, Deceased, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COMPAIR KELLOGG, a Division of Robertshaw Controls Company, Defendant-Appellee. No. 91-2737. United S
More

961 F.2d 211

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Rebekah HINDS, Individually, and as Personal Representative
of the Estate of Gregory W. Hinds, Deceased,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
COMPAIR KELLOGG, a Division of Robertshaw Controls Company,
Defendant-Appellee.

No. 91-2737.

United States Court of Appeals,
Fourth Circuit.

Argued: April 8, 1992
Decided: April 30, 1992

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, District Judge. (CA-91-166-3)

Argued: Harry Allan Wilson, Jr., WILSON, KEHOE & WININGHAM, Indianapolis, Indiana, for appellant.

Matthew James Calvert, HUNTON & WILLIAMS, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

On Brief: John E. Lichtenstein, BREMNER, BABER & JANUS, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellant.

James E. Farnham, Edward J. Fuhr, HUNTON & WILLIAMS, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

E.D.Va.

AFFIRMED.

Before WILKINSON, HAMILTON, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

1

Rebekah Hinds appeals the district court's entry of summary judgment for defendant CompAir Kellogg in Hinds' product liability action. We have considered the arguments of the parties, and affirm the judgment of the district court for the reasons stated by that court in its thorough opinion. See Hinds v. CompAir Kellogg, 776 F. Supp. 1102 (E.D. Va. 1991).

AFFIRMED

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer