Adams v. Drilling Measurements, Inc.

• Decision Date: 28 January 1988
• Docket Number: Civ. A. No. 85-1915.
• Citation: 678 F. Supp. 148
• Parties: Shirley Ann Maturin ADAMS, et al. v. DRILLING MEASUREMENTS, INC., et al.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Western District of Louisiana

678 F. Supp. 148

Shirley Ann Maturin ADAMS, et al. v. DRILLING MEASUREMENTS, INC., et al.

Civ. A. No. 85-1915.

United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Alexandria Division.

January 28, 1988.

Wilbert J. Saucier, Jr., Pineville, La., and Fuhrer, Flournoy & Hunter, Leonard Fuhrer, Alexandria, La., for plaintiff.

Gist, Methvin, Hughes & Munsterman, Howard B. Gist, III, Alexandria, La., for Pool and Employers.

Scott F. Stains, New Orleans, La., for Pool Co. of Texas and Exxon.

Louise V. White, T.A., William B. Matthews, Jr., and Paul J. Heim, New Orleans, La., for Exxon Corp.

Voorhies & Labbé, Amos H. Davis, Lafayette, La., for Drilling Measurements, Inc. and Interstate Fire & Cas. Co.

Guglielmo, Lopez & Tutle, James T. Guglielmo, Opelousas, La., for Burlington Compressor, Inc. (Burco Power Systems).

Provosty, Sadler & deLaunay, Ronald J. Fiorenza, Alexandria, La., for Buckner Rental Service.

Brittain, Williams & McGlathery, Jack O. Brittain, Natchitoches, La., for Miller Elec. Co.

RULING

LITTLE, District Judge.

This motion for summary judgment was brought by Burlington Compressor, Inc. (BURCO), Miller Electric Company and Buckner Rental Service, Buckner Rentals, Inc. and Buckner Rentals of Houma against Drilling Measurements, Inc. and its insurer, Interstate Fire & Casualty Company and the Pool Company. Although this motion will turn upon a question of legal principles under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, 43 U.S.C. § 1331, et seq., the background of the case is essential to its resolution.

Ray Adams, Jr. was electrocuted on 19 June 1985 while working on a fixed platform located in the territorial waters of the United States adjacent to the State of Texas. Adams' wife and child filed suit against Exxon, the platform owner, and Drilling Measurements, the provider of the electrical cord which caused Adams' accident. The plaintiffs settled their claims for $300,000 and dismissed the lawsuit pending in this Court against Exxon and Drilling Measurements. By way of an amended order of dismissal signed 22 May 1986, Exxon and Drilling Measurements reserved all contribution and indemnity rights against unnamed third parties. On 16 September 1986 Drilling Measurements filed a third-party demand against Buckner, BURCO and Miller asserting third-party defendants' liability "for failure to properly design, manufacture, assemble and/or equip said generators and/or electrical extension cord and/or due to their failure to place proper and/or adequate warnings of the said generator and/or electrical extension cord." Exxon intervened in the suit but was substituted by Pool after an assignment by Exxon to Pool.

All parties agree that the incident which terminated Adams' life occurred in the Outer Continental Shelf and that the exclusive rules governing this controversy are found in the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA), 43 U.S.C. § 1301 et seq. The parties further agree, and correctly so, that the OSCLA statute does not contain a detailed section governing delictual and quasi-delictual obligations. There is no inadequacy, however, as the Act specifically and simply adopts the law of the State adjacent to that portion of the Continental Shelf where the incident occurred.

To the extent that they are applicable and not inconsistent with this Act or with other Federal laws and regulations of the Secretary now in effect or hereafter adopted, the civil and criminal laws of each adjacent State now in effect or hereafter adopted, amended, or repealed, are hereby declared to be the law of the United States for that portion of the subsoil and seabed of the outer Continental Shelf and artificial islands and fixed structures created thereon, which would be within the area of the State if its boundaries were extended seaward to the outer margin of the outer Continental Shelf.... All of such applicable laws shall be administered and enforced by the appropriate officers and courts of the United States....

43 U.S.C. § 1333(a)(2)(A). The summary judgment motion of third-party defendants becomes meaningful when the Texas laws of contribution are considered. The Supreme Court of that state recently reviewed the contribution systems in Texas — two based on statute and one created at common law. The undisputed conclusion drawn from Beech Aircraft v. Jinkins, 739 S.W.2d 19 (Tex.1987) is that contribution rights against joint tort-feasors vanish when one joint tort-feasor settles plaintiff's entire claim, even if the joint tort-feasor reserves his right to claim against other joint tort-feasors or obtains an assignment of those rights from the settling plaintiff.

We hold that a defendant can only settle his proportionate share of community liability and cannot preserve contribution rights under either the common law or the comparative negligence statute by attempting to settle the plaintiff's entire claim. We are mindful of the general rule that a cause of action for damages for personal injuries may be sold or assigned. Our holding in the

...