Filed: Dec. 09, 2008
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED December 9, 2008 No. 08-30205 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk ROYAL FIBERGLASS POOLS INC Plaintiff - Appellant v. POLY SOLUTIONS INC; ULTRA POLYMERS INC Defendants - Appellees Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, Lafayette Cause No. 6:06-CV-1666 Before KING, DENNIS, and ELROD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The judgment of the district court is
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED December 9, 2008 No. 08-30205 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk ROYAL FIBERGLASS POOLS INC Plaintiff - Appellant v. POLY SOLUTIONS INC; ULTRA POLYMERS INC Defendants - Appellees Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, Lafayette Cause No. 6:06-CV-1666 Before KING, DENNIS, and ELROD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The judgment of the district court is ..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED December 9, 2008 No. 08-30205 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk ROYAL FIBERGLASS POOLS INC Plaintiff - Appellant v. POLY SOLUTIONS INC; ULTRA POLYMERS INC Defendants - Appellees Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, Lafayette Cause No. 6:06-CV-1666 Before KING, DENNIS, and ELROD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The judgment of the district court is affirmed. Assuming, arguendo, that sufficient proof of chalking was adduced, the district court correctly concluded that the plaintiff-appellant failed to provide sufficient proof that the Ultra Poly One Coat caused the chalking, having failed to rule out other possible causes. The affidavit of a Florida pool contractor, not designated as an expert, will not carry that load, particularly in view of the contractor’s recommendation that further testing be done. AFFIRMED. * Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
