Mable Smith v. the Sherwin-Williams Company

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-1430
MABLE SMITH; SHEATRINA SMITH,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
versus
THE SHERWIN-WILLIAMS COMPANY; DOLGENCORP,
INCORPORATED,
Defendants - Appellees,
and
CROWN CORK & SEAL COMPANY, INCORPORATED,
Party in Interest,
THE ESTATE OF THOMAS J. HARLAN, JR.,
Party in Interest.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District
Judge. (CA-02-623-2)
Submitted: September 29, 2003 Decided: October 10, 2003
Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
John M. Flora, EPSTEIN, SANDLER & FLORA, P.C., Norfolk, Virginia,
for Appellants. Scott C. Ford, Patricia A. Collins, MCCANDLISH
HOLTON, P.C., Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Mable Smith and Sheatrina Smith appeal the district court’s
order granting summary judgment for Defendants in their product
liability action. We have reviewed the briefs, the joint appendix,
and the district court’s order and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See
Smith v. The Sherwin-Williams Co., No. CA-02-623-2 (E.D. Va. Mar.
24, 2003). 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 of 2 --