Filed: Aug. 02, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-1155 NATHANIEL BROWN, Individually and as Father of Nannette Annita Brown, an infant; NANNETTE ANNITA BROWN, an infant, through her father and next friend (Joseph N. Bowman has been appointed as guardian ad litem for Nannette Annita Brown), Plaintiffs - Appellants, versus CAMPBELL SOUP COMPANY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Ca
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-1155 NATHANIEL BROWN, Individually and as Father of Nannette Annita Brown, an infant; NANNETTE ANNITA BROWN, an infant, through her father and next friend (Joseph N. Bowman has been appointed as guardian ad litem for Nannette Annita Brown), Plaintiffs - Appellants, versus CAMPBELL SOUP COMPANY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cac..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-1155 NATHANIEL BROWN, Individually and as Father of Nannette Annita Brown, an infant; NANNETTE ANNITA BROWN, an infant, through her father and next friend (Joseph N. Bowman has been appointed as guardian ad litem for Nannette Annita Brown), Plaintiffs - Appellants, versus CAMPBELL SOUP COMPANY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Chief District Judge. (CA-95-996-A) Submitted: May 28, 1996 Decided: August 2, 1996 Before HALL, WILKINS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Nathaniel Brown, Joseph N. Bowman, Appellants Pro Se. Mary Catherine Zinsner, MAYS & VALENTINE, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellants appeal from the district court's order entering summary judgment for Defendant in this product liability action. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the decision of the district court. Brown v. Campbell Soup Co., No. CA-95-996-A (E.D. Va. Jan. 5, 1996). 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 2