Case Name: Maria FERNANDEZ, mother and personal representative of the Estate of Ramon Fernandez, Plaintiff-Appellant, and Rose Kristosserson, Plaintiff, v. WATERWORKS AND INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY COMPANY, a West Virginia corporation; Bobby S. Overbey, an individual, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-03-27
Citations: 172 F. App'x 528
Docket Number: No. 05-2278
Parties: Maria FERNANDEZ, mother and personal representative of the Estate of Ramon Fernandez, Plaintiff—Appellant, and Rose Kristosserson, Plaintiff, v. WATERWORKS AND INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY COMPANY, a West Virginia corporation; Bobby S. Overbey, an individual, Defendants—Appellees.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 172
Pages: 528–529

Head Matter:
Maria FERNANDEZ, mother and personal representative of the Estate of Ramon Fernandez, Plaintiff—Appellant, and Rose Kristosserson, Plaintiff, v. WATERWORKS AND INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY COMPANY, a West Virginia corporation; Bobby S. Overbey, an individual, Defendants—Appellees.
No. 05-2278.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: March 23, 2006.
Decided: March 27, 2006.
Maria Fernandez, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Hylton Sanders, Huddleston, Bolen, Beatty, Porter & Copen, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellees.
Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Maria Fernandez appeals the district court's orders granting summary judgment to the defendants in her civil action in which she sought damages stemming from a car accident and denying her subsequent motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm both orders on the reasoning of the district court. See Fernandez v. Waterworks and Indus. Supply Co., No. CA-03-2423-3 (S.D.W. Va. Sept. 27, 2005 & Oct. 19, 2005). 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