Banks v. Wal-Mart Stores Texas, L.L.C.

Fifth Circuit

Banks v. Wal-Mart Stores Texas, L.L.C.

675 F. App'x 475

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 1, 2017

DocketNo. 16-20614 Summary Calendar

StatusPublished

This text of 675 F. App'x 475 (Banks v. Wal-Mart Stores Texas, L.L.C.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Banks v. Wal-Mart Stores Texas, L.L.C., 675 F. App'x 475 (5th Cir. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

*

Sandra Banks appeals a summary judgment dismissing her claim in this ordinary [476]*476slip-and-fall case. The district court issued a comprehensive and detailed twenty-three-page opinion that carefully examined the record, the facts, and the applicable law that Texas courts apply to similar matters. We cannot improve on the district court’s explication, which demonstrates why summary judgment is appropriate.

On appeal, Banks raises a new issue, claiming that Wal-Mart’s and its employee’s “credibility is called into question by Wal-Mart [sic] failing to save material video evidence.” She “may not assert it for the first time on appeal.” Miller v. Am. Strategic Ins. Corp., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 21731, at *4 (5th Cir. Dec. 6, 2016) (per curiam) (footnote omitted).

The summary judgment is AFFIRMED.

Pursuant To 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the Court Has Determined That This Opinion Should Not Be [476]*476Published and Is Not Precedent Except Under the Limited Circumstances Set Forth in 5th Cm. R. 47.5.4.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

*

Sandra Banks appeals a summary judgment dismissing her claim in this ordinary [476]*476slip-and-fall case. The district court issued a comprehensive and detailed twenty-three-page opinion that carefully examined the record, the facts, and the applicable law that Texas courts apply to similar matters. We cannot improve on the district court’s explication, which demonstrates why summary judgment is appropriate.

On appeal, Banks raises a new issue, claiming that Wal-Mart’s and its employee’s “credibility is called into question by Wal-Mart [sic] failing to save material video evidence.” She “may not assert it for the first time on appeal.” Miller v. Am. Strategic Ins. Corp., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 21731, at *4 (5th Cir. Dec. 6, 2016) (per curiam) (footnote omitted).

The summary judgment is AFFIRMED.

Pursuant To 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the Court Has Determined That This Opinion Should Not Be [476]*476Published and Is Not Precedent Except Under the Limited Circumstances Set Forth in 5th Cm. R. 47.5.4.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

675 F. App'x 475, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/banks-v-wal-mart-stores-texas-llc-ca5-2017.