Phillips v. Houston Fire & Casualty Insurance Company, 8654.
Decision Date | 10 July 1963 |
Docket Number | No. 8654.,8654. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Louisiana |
Parties | Harvey L. PHILLIPS et ux. v. HOUSTON FIRE & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY et al. |
Ramsey, Ramsey & Bodron, Vicksburg, Miss., and Pugh & Boudreaux, Nicholls Pugh, Jr., Lafayette, La., for plaintiffs.
Guillory, Guillory & Guillory, Robert K. Guillory, Eunice, La., and Mouton, Champagne & Colomb, Patrick L. Colomb, Lafayette, La., for defendant Houston Fire & Cas. Ins. Co.
Davidson, Meaux, Onebane & Donohoe, James E. Diaz, Lafayette, La., for defendant Celotex Corp.
Phelps, Dunbar, Marks, Claverie & Sims, J. Barnwell Phelps, New Orleans, La., Hudson, Potts & Bernstein, Murray Hudson, Monroe, La., for defendant Texas & P. Ry. Co.
This action is brought by plaintiffs for the alleged wrongful death of their son, Harvey Benjamin Phillips, against Houston Fire & Casualty Insurance Company, a Texas corporation, insurance carrier of Dugas and LeBlanc, Ltd., a Louisiana corporation not joined as a defendant. By supplemental petition, The Celotex Corporation, a Delaware corporation having its home office in Chicago, Illinois, was joined as a co-defendant.
Liability is predicated upon Article 2315 of the Louisiana Civil Code, LSA-C.C. art. 2315, which is the wrongful death statute of this State, and as to Houston, under the direct action statute of Louisiana, LSA-R.S. 22:655, which gives any injured person a direct cause of action against such insurance carriers without the necessity of joining the insured as a party defendant. Thus, by the simple expedient of leaving the Louisiana corporation out of the suit entirely, plaintiffs, who are themselves residents of this State, claim a Federal forum in preference to the Courts of their own State.
Diversity, although largely a fiction insofar as Houston is concerned, is established; the amount in dispute exceeds $10,000; our jurisdiction attaches. 28 U.S.C.A. § 1332.
It is alleged that the deceased was a member of a train crew employed by Texas and Pacific Railroad Company, and as part of his duties went upon the refinery premises of Dugas & LeBlanc for the purpose of picking up several heavily loaded freight cars loaded with bagasse, and while riding on one of these cars he was thrown therefrom, resulting in his injuries and death. It is further alleged that the negligence of Dugas and LeBlanc and of defendant Celotex caused plaintiffs' loss, in many particulars which we do not enumerate here, they being unimportant for decision of this motion.
Defendant Houston has filed a third party complaint against Texas & Pacific Railroad, claiming a right of contribution based upon alleged negligence of its own employees in bringing about the death of young Phillips. Texas & Pacific has moved to dismiss the third party complaint on the contention that Phillips was its employee and his exclusive remedy and that of his survivors, through his personal representative, is under the Federal Employer's Liability Act, Title 45 U.S. C.A. § 51 et seq. Coverage under this act is established.
We feel that this motion is sound, and should be granted.
Plaintiffs' action is predicated upon LSA-C.C. 2315, and survives in their favor as individuals. It is grounded on negligence which is a proximate cause of the death, and contributory negligence is a complete bar to recovery should it be established. Recovery may be had for pecuniary losses, loss of love and affection of the deceased, and for the pain, suffering and losses suffered by the decedent as the proximate result of his injuries prior to his death.
The right of contribution asserted against T. & P. by these defendants arises from LSA-C.C. Articles 2103 and 2091. These are as follows:
The foregoing articles of the Louisiana Code were amended to read as set forth above in 1960. Prior to that time one of two or more joint tort feasors had no right to demand contribution unless they were cast in judgment with him in solido. Since there was no right to demand contribution, he could not call in his joint tort feasors as third party defendants. Kahn v. Urbania Lumber Co., La.App., 103 So.2d 476. It was for this purpose that, as companion legislation with the Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure of 1960, these codal provisions were amended.
Article 2103 has application only where the obligation is solidary. Article 2091...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Brenham v. Southern Pacific Company
...to invoke liability if it plays any part, even the slightest, in bringing about the damage. See Phillips v. Houston Fire & Casualty Insurance Company, 219 F.Supp. 420 (W.D.La.1963). Also, contributory negligence is not a complete defense under the F.E.L.A., 45 U.S.C. § 53, although it is un......
-
Avondale Shipyards, Inc. v. Vessel Thomas E. Cuffe, 74-93.
...even if applied in a maritime case, would not be helpful to the contribution defendants. But cf. Phillips v. Houston Fire & Casualty Co., W.D.La.1963, 219 F.Supp. 420; Wooten v. Wimberly, La.1973, 272 So.2d 303; D'Albora v. Tulane University, La.App. 1973, 274 So.2d 15 Brown and Lanier mere......
-
Jackson v. Tenneco Oil Co.
...172 So.2d 721 (La. App. 4th Cir.1965); Hebert v. Blankenship, 187 So.2d 798 (La.App. 3d Cir.1966); Phillips v. Houston Fire and Casualty Insurance Company, 219 F.Supp. 420 (W.D.La. 1963); Brenham v. Southern Pacific Company, 328 F.Supp. 119 (W.D.La.1971), aff'd, 469 F.2d 1095 (5th Cir.1972)......
-
Crowder v. Gordons Transports, Inc.
...R. R., 342 F.2d 767 (6 Cir. 1965); Barrett v. Toledo, P. & W. R. R., 334 F.2d 803 (7 Cir. 1964); Phillips v. Houston Fire & Cas. Ins. Co., 219 F.Supp. 420, 423-424 (W. D.La.1963); and Wilson v. Massagee, 224 N.C. 705, 32 S.E.2d 335, 340, 156 A. L.R. 922 (1944). They point out that the FELA ......