UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-1526
MYRTLE M. WATSON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
PARAMOUNT PARKS, INCORPORATED, t/a Paramount
Kings Dominion,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior
District Judge. (CA-95-900)
Argued: January 31, 1997 Decided: March 11, 1997
Before HAMILTON and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
ARGUED: Thomas James Schilling, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellant.
Charles Garrison Meyer, III, MCGUIRE, WOODS, BATTLE & BOOTHE,
L.L.P., Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: B. Mayes
Marks, Jr., Hopewell, Virginia, for Appellant.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Myrtle M. Watson appeals the summary judgment in favor of
Paramount Parks, Inc. Watson tripped and fell over a water meter
cover that protruded approximately five-eighths of an inch in a
major pedestrian thoroughfare in the park.
Watson complains that the district court's finding that 20
million people walked over the path without incident is exagger-
ated. The court's finding, however, was based on the deposition of
the park's safety officer who estimated that in the past 28 years
19 to 21 million people visited the park. In any event, it is
undisputed that several million people walked over the park's
thoroughfares since the water meter was installed in 1975 without
complaint or notice to the park that the meter cover was a dan-
gerous or hazardous condition. The evidence also disclosed that
independent safety inspectors, as well as park employees, walked
over the pedestrian thoroughfare without reporting that the meter
cover created an unsafe and dangerous condition.
The district court's conclusion that Watson could produce no
evidence that Paramount had notice of an unsafe or dangerous
condition is well grounded in fact and Virginia law. We affirm
for reasons adequately stated by the district court. Watson v.
Paramount Parks, Inc., CA-95-900 (E.D. Va. 1996).
AFFIRMED
2