Case ID: f-appx_272/html/0779-01.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

Thomas R. MANION, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 07-15314
    Non-Argument Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
    April 2, 2008.
    Bruce Edward Committe, Pensacola, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
    Scott T. Dickens, Fultz Maddox Hovious & Dickens, PLC, Louisville, KY, for Defendant-Appellee.
    Before MARCUS, WILSON and COX, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

The sole issue on this appeal is the propriety of the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the Defendant. Having carefully considered the briefs and relevant parts of the record, we conclude that the court properly granted General Electric Company’s motion for summary judgment. The content, placement, and presentation of the warnings it provided were adequate to place the Plaintiff on notice that his range could tip if the anti-tip device was not properly installed.

AFFIRMED.