Case Law

Date Decided: April 3^rd, 2009

Originally Filed in: ()

Decided by: (State)

Court: United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana

Judge: District Judge Vance

Citation: 2009 WL 928870 (ED LA)

Background:
Plaintiff, Robert Whittal ("Employee") sustained injuries when his air delivery system aboard a barge failed while he was underwater performing diving operations. 

Three companies were allegedly responsible for the injury. Denbury Onshore ("Denbury") had provided for the barge and the diving crew to be at the site. Denbury contracted with Frisco Construction Co. ("Frisco") to provide the barge, and Specialty Offshore ("Specialty") to provide the diving crew.

In August 2007, the employee sued all three companies under the Jones Act and general maritime law.

Frisco filed cross-claims against Specialty and Denbury. Frisco moved for summary judgment against Specialty. Specialty did not file an opposition, and the Court granted Frisco's motion.

Specialty moved to reconsider the Court's Order. They asserted that their counsel was appointed to defend it only against the Jones Act and maritime law claims, and not Frisco's claim.

Issues:
Whether the Court will reconsider their prior Order against Specialty.

Held:

Specialty presented several arguments why the Court should reconsider its order granting Frisco summary judgment. None have merit.

Specialty contended that under Fifth Circuit precedent, Frisco must exhaust its insurance requirements before indemnity provisions can be invoked. The Court dismissed the argument, as well as the others, finding them all to be irrelevant.

The Court concluded no error of law or fact was made. Reconsideration of the original Court Order was denied.

Comments:

Significance:

In a majority of cases, one or both parties will file a motion for summary judgment.  The motion, if granted, will resolve the case or issues within the case without going to trial. 

A party moving for summary judgment is attempting to eliminate the costs and risks associated with going to trial.  The moving party will also try to persuade the Court that the facts are undisputed, and judgment should be entered in their favor.

The moving party bears the risk that the judge will find the other party is entitled to summary judgment.

Steve Gordon
http://www.offshoreinjuries.com