Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca3-07-02912/USCOURTS-ca3-07-02912-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 365
Nature of Suit: Personal Injury - Product Liability
Cause of Action: 

---

NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

_____________

No. 07-2912

_____________

DONNA IANNONE,

an individual

v.

J.C. PENNEY COMPANY;

J.C. PENNEY CORPORATION,

t/d/b/a J.C. PENNEY;

FURNITURE BRANDS INTERNATIONAL, INC.;

LANE FURNITURE INDUSTRIES, INC.;

ACTION INDUSTRIES, INC.

Donna Iannone,

 Appellant

 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Pennsylvania

(D.C. Civil No. 05-cv-00710)

District Judge: Honorable Gary L. Lancaster

 

Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)

June 30, 2008

Before: RENDELL, SMITH and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

Filed: July 18, 2008

 

OPINION OF THE COURT

 

Case: 07-2912 Document: 00311974219 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/18/2008
2

RENDELL, Circuit Judge.

Plaintiff, Donna Iannone, appeals the District Court’s orders adopting the Report

and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge and entering final judgment in favor of the

defendants, J.C. Penney Company, Inc., J.C. Penney Corporation, Inc. t/d/b/a J.C.

Penney, (together “J.C. Penney”), Furniture Brands International, Inc., Lane Furniture

Industries, Inc., and Action Industries, Inc. In her complaint, Iannone alleged that the

defendants were liable for injuries she received from a defective reclining chair that was

purchased from J.C. Penney and engineered by Lane Furniture, Inc. and/or Action

Industries, Inc., wholly owned subsidiaries of Furniture Brands International, Inc. At the

close of discovery, the defendants moved for summary judgment. The Magistrate Judge

subsequently issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that defendants’

summary judgment motion be granted because the expert testimony offered by Iannone as

to causation was not stated with the degree of certainty required under Pennsylvania law

to create a genuine issue of material fact for trial. Iannone filed objections to the Report

and Recommendation, but the District Court ultimately adopted it and entered final

judgment in favor of defendants and against Iannone. 

Having reviewed the record, we find the Magistrate Judge’s Report and

Recommendation well-reasoned and do not find any ground for disturbing or varying

from its analysis. Accordingly, we will affirm the order of the District Court for the

reasons set forth in the Magistrate Judge’s thorough Report and Recommendation.

Case: 07-2912 Document: 00311974219 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/18/2008