Case Name: James Jamie HINSON, Plaintiff-Appellant v. TECHTRONICS INDUSTRIES FACTORY OUTLETS, INCORPORATED; Home Depot USA, Incorporated, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-04-06
Citations: 644 F. App'x 371
Docket Number: No. 15-30890
Parties: James Jamie HINSON, Plaintiff-Appellant v. TECHTRONICS INDUSTRIES FACTORY OUTLETS, INCORPORATED; Home Depot USA, Incorporated, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before DAVIS, JONES, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 644
Pages: 371–371

Head Matter:
James Jamie HINSON, Plaintiff-Appellant v. TECHTRONICS INDUSTRIES FACTORY OUTLETS, INCORPORATED; Home Depot USA, Incorporated, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 15-30890
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
April 6, 2016.
Jeffery F. Speer, Esq., Doueet-Speer, A.P.L.C., Lafayette, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Richard Gerald Norris, II, Esq., Richard Tracy Conrad, III, Esq., Kenna L. Mansfield, Jr., Esq., Wells, Marble & Hurst, P.L.L.C., Ridgeland, MS, for Defendants-Appellees.
Before DAVIS, JONES, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
In this appeal from an adverse summary judgment ruling, Appellant fails to point to any evidence in the record supporting his res ipsa loquitur claims against Appellees for an injury he suffered while using a pressure-washer he purchased from Home Depot. He has failed to brief on appeal and thus abandoned his other claims. The judgment of the district court, rendered with a thorough opinion discussing the flaws in and absence of evidence to support Appellant's theories, is 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.