Case ID: f-appx_77/html/0664-01.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

Mable SMITH; Sheatrina Smith, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. 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.
    No. 03-1430.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 29, 2003.
    Decided Oct. 10, 2003.
    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.
    Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   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.