Skip to main content

Insurer Wins Dec Judgment Action in 5th Circuit on Indemnity Provisions in Contract

In Ace American Ins. Co. v. M-I, L.L.C., Case No. 12-20080, (5th Cir. Oct. 19, 2012), the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's grant of partial summary judgment on behalf of an insurer, finding that the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act ("OCSLA"), 43 U.S.C. 1333(a), applied to the parties' contractual dispute. As a result, the court found that pursuant to the OCSLA choice of law provision, Louisiana law applied, under which the Louisiana Oilfield Indemnity Act ("LOIA"), La. Rev. Stat. 9:2780(B), invalidated the indemnity provisions.

The dispute concerned a Master Service Agreement ("MSA") between BP and a service company. Contained within the MSA was an indemnification provision, which contained an insurance agreement supporting the service company's indemnification obligations. An employee of the service company was injured, sued BP and the service company, BP tendered the employee's claims to the service company, which in turn settled all claims with the employee. The service company's insurer then filed an action for declaratory judgment, seeking a declaration that it did not owe coverage payments to the service company. The service company countersued the insurer for breach of contract.

At issue in the case was whether Louisiana law governed the indemnity provisions. The Fifth Circuit agreed with the district court that in order for the OCSLA indemnity provision in the MSA to apply, maritime law must not apply upon its own force. The court agreed that the employee's work on a oil field platform was not maritime in nature. Therefore, Louisiana law applied, invalidating the indemnity provisions in the MSA.

If you are interested in receiving a copy of the complete decision, please feel free to contact me at mov@chaloslaw.com.  

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Maritime Law--Florida's Arbitration Code Is Now Revised

Those of us that practice maritime law regularly must always be on the lookout for the contract that may contain an arbitration clause. Thus, any laws related to arbitration are important to those of us practicing in this sector.       The Florida legislature has revised the Florida Arbitration Code ("FAC") and named it the Revised Florida Arbitration Code (the " Revised Act"). Since 1967, the FAC had gone mostly unchanged. The Revised Act addresses concepts that were not addressed in the old law, such as the ability of arbitrators to issue provision remedies, challenges based on notice, consolidation of separate arbitration proceedings, required conflict disclosures by arbitrators, among other major changes. The Revised Act lays out a detailed framework for international arbitration conducted under Florida law and repeals sections of the FAC. The Revised Act spells out what experienced arbitrators knew the case law to be, but codifies it all in one pl...

Maritime Law--Lozman Case Revisited in Miami?

In Hoefling v. City of Miami , Case no.: 14-12482 (11th Cir. Jan. 25, 2016), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit revived almost all of Hoefling's claims. You ask, "Who is Hoefling?" Hoefling  lived on his sailboat Metis O moored off Dinner Key for nearly a decade—until the day he came home and it was gone. About three months earlier, an officer from the Miami Police Department's Marine Patrol Detail tagged Hoefling's vessel for lacking a sanitary device and a working anchor light. He had a deal to use the facilities at the nearby marina but quickly went out and reportedly bought what he needed to comply. Three months later while he was on a business trip, the City of Miami seized and destroyed his boat and all his belongings. As a result, he was homeless. He sued under § 1983, maritime law, and state law. He stated a claim under the Fourth Amendment for seizure and destruction without notice or cause and a “taking.”    At the ...

Maritime Law--Novel Rule B Attachment Rejected by Eleventh Circuit

In World Wide Supply OU v. Quail Cruises Ship Management , Case No. 14-14838 (11th Cir. Sept. 30, 2015), the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s order vacating an attachment of legal settlement funds.  At issue in this appeal was an attachment of property made pursuant to Supplemental Admiralty Rule B. This appeal had a complicated background, involving multiple lawsuits in federal district courts, Florida state court, and a Spanish bankruptcy court. The common denominator of these suits was Quail Cruises Ship Management, from which multiple parties, including participants in the appeal, tried to collect money that they believed Quail owed them. This is not surprising, as there have been numerous cases against Quail due to a failed cruise venture they operated. The money at issue arose from the legal settlement of a dispute over the purchase of a cruise ship featured on ABC Television Network’s long-running series, The Love Boat. The ...