Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

96-1426 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Number: 96-1426 Visitors: 6
Filed: Nov. 27, 1996
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 103 F.3d 135 NOTICE: Eighth Circuit Rule 28A(k) governs citation of unpublished opinions and provides that they are not precedent and generally should not be cited unless relevant to establishing the doctrines of res judicata, collateral estoppel, the law of the case, or if the opinion has persuasive value on a material issue and no published opinion would serve as well. Ronald BIRMINGHAM; Bonnie Birmingham; Herbert Betz; Linda Betz, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. METTLER-TOLEDO, INC., doing business
More

103 F.3d 135

NOTICE: Eighth Circuit Rule 28A(k) governs citation of unpublished opinions and provides that they are not precedent and generally should not be cited unless relevant to establishing the doctrines of res judicata, collateral estoppel, the law of the case, or if the opinion has persuasive value on a material issue and no published opinion would serve as well.
Ronald BIRMINGHAM; Bonnie Birmingham; Herbert Betz; Linda
Betz, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
METTLER-TOLEDO, INC., doing business as Toledo Scale
Company, also known as Mettler Instrument Corp., also known
as CIBA Geigy, also known as CIBA-Geigy SA France, also
known as CIBA-Geigy AG Swiss, also known as Reliance
Electric Engineering Co., also known as Reliance Electric
Company; Farrel Co., a division of USM Corporation;
CIBA-Geigy Corporation, Defendants-Appellees,
BRIDGESTONE/FIRESTONE, INC., Intervenor Below--Appellant.

No. 96-1426.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted Nov. 19, 1996.
Decided Nov. 27, 1996.

Before FAGG and HANSEN, Circuit Judges, and MAGNUSON,* District

PER CURIAM.

1

The Birmingham, Betz, and Bridgestone/Firestone appellants appeal the district court's order granting summary judgment in this diversity-based products liability action. After de novo review, we conclude that no error of law appears, and we affirm the judgment of the district court for the reasons stated in its order. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We also deny the pending motion for dismissal from the appeal and the related request for sanctions as moot.

2

Affirmed.

*

The Honorable Paul A. Magnuson, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota, sitting by designation

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