Craig v. Mills Corp.

Third Circuit

Craig v. Mills Corp.

350 F. App'x 714

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit

DecidedOctober 30, 2009

DocketNo. 08-2636

StatusPublished

This text of 350 F. App'x 714 (Craig v. Mills Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Craig v. Mills Corp., 350 F. App'x 714 (3d Cir. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

McKEE, Circuit Judge.

Christine and James Craig appeal the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the defendants on the tort claim they filed to recover for injuries Christine suffered after slipping and falling at the defendants’ retail shopping mall. We will affirm.

As we write primarily for the parties who are familiar with this case, we need not recite the procedural or factual background. Moreover, we have reviewed the thoughtful Memorandum filed by the Hon. Eduardo Robreno on May 23, 2008, 555 F.Supp.2d 547, explaining why there is no genuine issue of material fact as to defendants’ liability and why the defendants are therefore entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

We can add little to Judge Robreno’s discussion of this case and we will therefore affirm the order he entered on May 23, 2008, granting summary judgment in favor of Control Building Services, and Franklin Mills Associates, L.P., and against Christine and James Craig, substantially for the reasons set forth therein.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

OPINION

McKEE, Circuit Judge.

Christine and James Craig appeal the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the defendants on the tort claim they filed to recover for injuries Christine suffered after slipping and falling at the defendants’ retail shopping mall. We will affirm.

As we write primarily for the parties who are familiar with this case, we need not recite the procedural or factual background. Moreover, we have reviewed the thoughtful Memorandum filed by the Hon. Eduardo Robreno on May 23, 2008, 555 F.Supp.2d 547, explaining why there is no genuine issue of material fact as to defendants’ liability and why the defendants are therefore entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

We can add little to Judge Robreno’s discussion of this case and we will therefore affirm the order he entered on May 23, 2008, granting summary judgment in favor of Control Building Services, and Franklin Mills Associates, L.P., and against Christine and James Craig, substantially for the reasons set forth therein.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

350 F. App'x 714, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/craig-v-mills-corp-ca3-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack