Fontenot v. Stanolind Oil and Gas Company

• Citation: 144 F. Supp. 818
• Decision Date: 21 September 1956
• Docket Number: 5353.,Civ. A. No. 5352
• Parties: Louis FONTENOT v. STANOLIND OIL AND GAS COMPANY, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, Intervenor. Viola ANDRUS, Widow of Eugene Laviolette, Individually, and on Behalf of Minor Child, Richard Allen Laviolette, v. STANOLIND OIL AND GAS COMPANY, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, Intervenor.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Western District of Louisiana

144 F. Supp. 818

Louis FONTENOT v. STANOLIND OIL AND GAS COMPANY, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, Intervenor.

Viola ANDRUS, Widow of Eugene Laviolette, Individually, and on Behalf of Minor Child, Richard Allen Laviolette, v. STANOLIND OIL AND GAS COMPANY, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, Intervenor.

Civ. A. Nos. 5352, 5353.

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

September 21, 1956.

Paul C. Tate, Mamou, La., Emile A. Carmouche, Jr., Crowley, La., for plaintiffs.

Lemle & Kelleher, Adams & Reese, New Orleans, La., for defendant.

Davidson, Meaux, Onebane & Nenrbass, Lafayette, La., for intervenor.

HUNTER, District Judge.

These consolidated cases arise out of a fire which occurred on January 25, 1955, on a lease of Stanolind Oil and Gas Company in the "Pine Prairie Field" in Evangeline Parish, Louisiana. They present two more of the ever increasing tort suits brought by covered and fully compensated employees of a contractor against the principal.

The two complaints and the respective causes of action are almost identical except one involves a death action and the other a personal injury suit. Defendant seeks summary judgment in each case on the theory that no material fact issue is in dispute, and that as a matter of law plaintiffs cannot recover.

The question is whether workmen's compensation was plaintiffs' exclusive remedy under pertinent Louisiana statutes¹. The substantial question which this Court must now decide is:

Does the record present a fact issue for the jury to decide as to whether the work being done by the employees of the contractor at the time of their injury was a part of the defendant's trade, business or occupation within the meaning of Section 6 of the Louisiana Compensation Statute? (Footnote 1, supra.)

Plaintiffs seek to defeat the motion for summary judgment and to avoid the bar to their cause of action by alleging that the work which was being done at the time of the explosion and fire was not a part of the regular trade, business or occupation of the defendant. Nevertheless, the law is well settled that for the purposes of a summary judgment motion the allegations of the complaint are not necessarily to be taken as true and must give way to facts on which there can be no difference of opinion.

The uncontradicted affidavits of six persons have been made a part of defendant's motions.

The affidavit of T. L. Cullom, Field Superintendent for Stanolind, discloses:

That Stanolind is a large integrated oil company which prospects for oil, and produces, refines, and sells petroleum products. In its operations it drills its own wells, both by its own employees and through the medium of independent contractors. It likewise operates its own oil fields.

Installed in the Pine Prairie Field where this accident occurred were four emulsion heater treaters. An emulsion heater treater is a large vessel; its mechanical value is to separate oil from the water by means of heating, the oil being saved and the water being run off through a discharge pipe. The heater treaters at the Pine Prairie Field have been owned by Stanolind for approximately six years and had been in operation there for over four years, during which time they had been serviced periodically by Stanolind employees or by outside contractors.

Stanolind has on its Lafayette payroll 79 employees doing maintenance and service work, but when the servicing work is greater than these men can take care of, outside contractors are called in to furnish labor to perform the maintenance and service. At the time that the employees involved here received their injuries, they were performing work customarily performed by Stanolind employees but they were employed by B. Lewis Contractor, Inc., of Eunice, Louisiana, a contractor who regularly does subcontracting work for Stanolind.

V. G. Primrose, Stanolind's Pumper on the lease, discloses by affidavit that:

The four heater treaters are under his primary supervision. They are serviced at irregular intervals, but maintenance work has been performed on all of them during the period that he has been employed on the lease. On some occasions the maintenance was performed by Stanolind employees, but on other occasions by employees of outside contractors. Mr. Primrose, in the course of a routine inspection of the lease, on the morning of January 25, 1955, noticed that one of the heater treaters was not functioning properly and he called his Gang Pusher, George Wolfe, to advise him of the situation. Five employees of B. Lewis Contractor, Inc., arrived and started cleaning the heater treater.²

George Wolfe, the Stanolind Gang Pusher, by affidavit reveals:

That Mr. Primrose called him and advised that some oil was escaping from one of the heater treaters. Since he had no Stanolind employees available to do the necessary repair or maintenance work, he called the office of B. Lewis Contractor, Inc., at Eunice, Louisiana, and requested that they furnish Stanolind with a Pusher and four men to clean and wash the heater treater. During the six years he was working for Stanolind he had seen and supervised cleaning and maintenance work on this type of equipment on numerous occasions, and such work is normally done by Stanolind employees, but where no employees are available, by outsiders.

Luke T. Boone gives us the following information:

"I am employed by Stanolind Oil & Gas Company as a Head Roustabout and was so employed on January 25, 1955. On that day at about 4 p. m. I went to the O & V Ardoin Unit `B' Lease in the Pine Prairie Oil Field, to check on a valve on a treater, which I had been told was not functioning properly.

"I met Edward M. McDaniel, the pusher of a crew of men employed by B. Lewis, Contractor, Inc., coming from the location. McDaniel told me he was looking for our pumper because the top compartment of the treater which he was cleaning was hot. I went to the treater with McDaniel and noticed vapor coming out of the top compartment. I told McDaniel to have his men put the flanges back on the treater to permit it to cool down or smother any smoldering matter contained in the compartment, and while they were doing so, an explosion and fire occurred which burned Fontenot and Laviolette, two of the employees of B. Lewis Contractor, Inc., engaged in cleaning the treater."

E. M. McDaniel, the Foreman of the crew on which Fontenot and Laviolette were working, says:

"I am employed by Eunice Contracting Company, Inc., as a Pusher. On January 25, 1955, I received orders to proceed with a truck and four men, Eugene Laviolette, Lewis Fontenot, Dovic Marcantel and Glady Thibodeaux, to the Stanolind Oil & Gas O & V Ardoin Unit `B' Lease at Pine Prairie Oil Field near Easton, La. We started to clean a treater on the leasehold but before we had completed the job we noticed vapor or smoke coming from the top compartment.

I talked with Luke Boone, head roustabout for Stanolind Oil & Gas Company, who was there, and he advised us to cease work and to put the flanges back on the open sections of the heater so that any fire in the heater would be smothered. While this was being done an explosion and fire occurred in which Laviolette and Fontenot were burned."

Joseph C. Moss, the Office Manager of B. Lewis Contractor, Inc., discloses by his affidavit that:

An order was received by his organization for a Pusher and a crew of four men to be sent to the Stanolind lease for the purpose of performing maintenance or service work on some of the equipment. Pursuant to the order, the four men under McDaniel as their foreman were sent to the lease. B. Lewis Contractor, Inc., is owned by the same interest which owns Eunice Contracting Company, Inc., and the two corporations have joint offices. They are engaged in substantially the same type of work. B. Lewis Contractor, Inc., is an approved contractor for Stanolind, so when Stanolind sends an order to B. Lewis Contractor, Inc., for labor, Lewis fills the order and invoices Stanolind on its own billhead. If labor only is involved, however, as was true in the instant case, the employees regularly on the payroll of Eunice Contracting Company are sent to perform the work, and that company is reimbursed by Lewis for the amount of the charges made to Stanolind.

Plaintiffs have offered detailed affidavits by Mr. McDaniel and by another member of the crew, Mr. Glady Thibodeaux, which read in pertinent part as follows:

Mr. E. M. Daniel says:

"I am employed by Eunice Contracting Company, Inc., as a Pusher. On January 25, 1955, I received orders to proceed with a truck and four men, Eugene Laviolette, Louis Fontenot, Dovic Marcantel, and Glady Thibodeaux, to the Stanolind Oil Field near Easton, Louisiana.

"We started to clean a treater on the leasehold.

"We commenced on the first or lower compartment. When the first excelsior was removed, I took a small handful of it and noticed that it was `charred' and could be powdered very easily. We saw no live coals or smoke in this compartment.

"We left the first or lower compartment open and removed the flange from the second or middle compartment. Here the excelsior was still charry. As we were finishing the removal of the excelsior in this compartment, my attention was called to white vapor or smoke coming from the top of the opening of the second compartment.

"We left the second compartment and removed the flange from the third or top compartment. Considerable smoke came out when we removed the flange and continued to come out. Laviolette removed a few handfuls of excelsior when I noticed that a piece or chunk, in falling, trailed a `bluish-white' smoke or vapor. When it touched the ground, I picked it up. It was smouldering (had live coals in it) and it burnt my fingers appreciably. I immediately turned to Louis Fontenot standing beside me and said, `Louis, this is on fire!' I shouted up to Laviolette: `Gene, get down off that ladder, this could blow up!' I then told all the men to get out of the

...