Case ID: f-appx_301/html/0374-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM: \n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

ROYAL FIBERGLASS POOLS INC., Plaintiff-Appellant v. POLY SOLUTIONS INC.; Ultra Polymers Inc., Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 08-30205.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Dec. 9, 2008.
    Christopher H. Hebert, Rabalais, Hanna & Hebert, Lafayette, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
    Glenn Michael Farnet, Gina Dressel Banks, Kean, Miller, Hawthorne, D’Armond, McCowan & Jarman, Baton Rouge, LA, for Defendants-Appellees.
    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       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.