DocketNumber： 13-30598
Judges： Jolly, Smith, Clement
Filed Date： 1/8/2014
Status： Non-Precedential
Modified Date： 11/6/2024
Plaintiff describes the instant case as follows:
Clarence Hill filed this suit because while he was employed by an oilfield pipe handling facility ..., he inhaled radioactive dust that generated from the cleaning by mechanical means and the sandblasting of the pipes. The District Court dismissed. his claim and granted defendants’ summary judgment motion because the court believed there was no genuine issue of material fact since Hill had failed to provide enough evidence to establish his exposure to radiation. The court found that Hill could not establish for certain that [Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (“NORM”) ] radiation existed at the ... pipe yard during his time of employment.
The district court granted summary judgment for the defendants with a careful and thorough Order and Reasons. The court’s reasoning can be summarized in the following excerpt:
[I]t is undisputed that new pipe does not have scale, and not all used pipe has scale. Further, not all used pipe with scale contains NORM. In order to prove his exposure, then, Hill must show that he handled a specific category of defendants’ pipes, namely, used pipes with scale containing NORM. Hill offers no direct evidence that he was exposed to defendants’ pipes with scale containing NORM. Hill’s [circumstantial] evidence requires an impermissible chain of speculation to find that he was exposed to radiation in defendants’ pipes.
(Footnote and paragraph breaks omitted.)
We have examined the briefs and applicable law and pertinent parts of the record. There is no error, and the summary judgment 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.