Case ID: f-appx_279/html/0333-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Stephen W. FRITZ; Lori B. Fritz, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. CAMPBELL HAUSFELD/SCOTT FETZER COMPANY; Briggs & Stratton Corporation, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 07-5801.
    United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
    May 19, 2008.
    Before KENNEDY, BATCHELDER, and GRIFFIN, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Plaintiffs Stephen and Lori Fritz appeal the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants Campbell Hausfeld /Scott Fetzer Company and Briggs & Stratton Corporation.

Stephen Fritz sustained injuries while using a Campbell Hausfeld/Scott Fetzer gasoline-powered pressure washer equipped with a Briggs & Stratton engine. Plaintiffs thereafter brought suit against defendants, asserting theories of strict products liability, negligence, and breach of warranty. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of both defendants and dismissed Fritz’s complaint on the ground that plaintiffs failed to produce prima facie evidence of a product defect causally linked to Stephen Fritz’s claimed injury.

After reviewing the record, the parties’ briefs, and the applicable law, and hearing oral argument, we conclude that issuance of a panel opinion would not serve any jurisprudential purpose. Thus, we affirm the district court’s well-reasoned decision for the reasons stated in that court’s May 29, 2007, opinion and order.

AFFIRMED.