Janelle Hill v. Kenneth Labowitz
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:09-cv-00463-CMH-TRJ Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999339852]. Mailed to: Janelle Hill and William Hill. [13-2169]
Appeal: 13-2169
Doc: 33
Filed: 04/21/2014
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-2169
JANELLE HILL, Individually and as the Next Friend of
S.A.H.; WILLIAM HILL, Individually and as the Next Friend
of S.A.H.,
Plaintiffs - Appellees,
SANOFI-AVENTIS U.S., INC.,
Defendant – Appellee,
v.
MEDCON, INC.,
Intervenor – Appellant,
and
KENNETH EDWARD LABOWITZ, Guardian ad litem for S.A.H.,
Party Below.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria.
Claude M. Hilton, Senior
District Judge. (1:09-cv-00463-CMH-TRJ)
Submitted:
April 17, 2014
Decided:
Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
April 21, 2014
Appeal: 13-2169
Doc: 33
Filed: 04/21/2014
Pg: 2 of 3
Joshua Harry Erlich, ERLICH LAW OFFICE, Arlington, Virginia, for
Appellant. Janelle Hill, Ozona, Florida; William Hill, Norfolk,
Virginia; Syed Mohsin Reza, Mary Catherine Zinsner, TROUTMAN
SANDERS, LLP, Tysons Corner, Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
Appeal: 13-2169
Doc: 33
Filed: 04/21/2014
Pg: 3 of 3
Inc.
the
PER CURIAM:
Medcon,
appeals
district
court’s
order
denying its motion to intervene in a closed civil action.
have
reviewed
the
record
and
find
no
reversible
We
error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court.
Va.
Hill v. Sanofi-Aventis, No. 1:09-cv-00463-CMH-TRJ (E.D.
filed
Aug.
13,
2013;
entered
Aug.
14,
2013).
Medcon’s
motion to strike Janelle Hill’s informal brief is denied.
dispense
with
contentions
are
oral
argument
adequately
because
presented
in
the
the
facts
We
and
legal
materials
before
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?