The Louisiana Third Circuit recently affirmed a trial court discovery ruling that allowed the defendant to design its own e-discovery protocol without input from plaintiffs. In doing so, the Third Circuit bolstered the longstanding principle that trial courts have considerable discretion over discovery issues.
Continue Reading E-Discovery Update: Louisiana Third Circuit Affirms Defendant’s Authority to Govern Its Own E-Discovery Protocols
In Air & Liquid Systems Corp. v. Devries, No. 17-1104, — S. Ct. —, 2019 WL 1245520 (U.S. March 19, 2019), the U.S. Supreme Court resolved a circuit split regarding maritime law and the “bare metal” defense, namely whether manufacturers have a duty to warn when their bare metal product requires later incorporation of a dangerous part in order for the integrated product to function as intended. Justice Kavanaugh wrote the opinion for a 6-3 court, with Justices Gorsuch, Thomas, and Alito dissenting.
In Air and Liquid Systems Corp v. Devries, the defendant manufacturers produced shipboard equipment such as pumps, blowers, and turbines for various Navy ships on which the plaintiffs, two Navy veterans, were employed. The equipment required asbestos insulation or asbestos parts to function as intended. However, the defendant manufacturers did not always incorporate the asbestos into their products; they delivered much of the equipment to the Navy without asbestos. The defendants’ equipment was delivered in a condition known as “bare metal,” and the Navy later added the asbestos to the equipment.
I attended a great meeting yesterday at the Port of New Orleans hosted by the FBA Admiralty Law Committee. Here are some bullets and takeaways, which are certainly of interest to anyone in the maritime industry along the lower Mississippi River. I am especially grateful that the following people were able to speak with us:
It’s wonderful to have people at such a high level take time out of their day to share the latest and greatest of what’s going on locally in our industry.
Continue Reading FBA Provides Update on Maritime Developments in New Orleans and the Lower Mississippi River Region
In Warren Lester, et al. v. Exxon Mobil Corp., et al., No. 14-31383, ___ F.3d ___ (5th Cir. 1/9/2018), the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an opinion addressing two issues of first impression involving the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (“CAFA”).[1] A full copy of the opinion can be accessed here.
Continue Reading U.S. Fifth Circuit Issues CAFA Opinion in Mass Action Addressing Two Issues of First Impression
Case: United States v. American Commercial Lines, L.L.C., No. 16-31150, ___ F.3d ___ (5th Cir. 11/7/17).
Factual Background
In July of 2008, nearly 300,000 gallons of oil spilled into the Mississippi River in New Orleans when a tugboat towing an oil-filled barge veered across the river into the path of an ocean-going tanker. American Commercial Lines (“ACL”) owned the tug MEL OLIVER, and bareboat chartered its tug to DRD Towing. DRD then operated the MEL OLIVER under a time charter to ACL. At the time of the collision, the MEL OLIVER, which was pushing ACL’s barge DM-932 fully laden with oil, was operating without a captain who had effectively abandoned the vessel several days earlier. The Steersman left in charge was allegedly sound asleep at the wheel at the time of the collision as he had been working for nearly 36 straight hours. The TINTOMARA, a tanker, collided with the DM-932, causing the barge to break away and ultimately sink in the Mississippi River resulting in the spill of approximately 300,000 gallons of oil into the River. As owner of the leaking barge, ACL was deemed the responsible party under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (“OPA ’90”).
Continue Reading U.S. Fifth Circuit Affirms $20 Million Judgment Against Barge Owner as Responsible Party Under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990
Case: Warren v. Shelter Mutual Ins. Co., No. 2016-C-1647 (La. 10/18/17), ___ So. 3d ___.
Factual Background
A recreational boating accident occurred on navigable inland waters of Louisiana in May of 2005 resulting in the death of a 22-year old passenger. While the boat was on plane, the hydraulic steering system manufactured by defendant Teleflex suddenly failed due to fluid loss, causing the boat to turn violently with the motor going into a free spin (known in the industry as a “J-hook” or “kill spin”). Decedent and other passengers were ejected from the boat, and thereafter, the boat continued to spin around with its propeller striking decedent 19 times, resulting in death.
Decedent’s parents[1] filed suit under general maritime law and products liability for the wrongful death of their son, and sought punitive damages under the general maritime law. Their claims against Teleflex, a sophisticated boating industry manufacturer, centered on its failure to warn unsuspecting users of the inherent danger in its product—that a very small loss of fluid would result in loss of steering and potentially cause ejection and death.
Following trial,[2] the jury rendered a verdict in favor of the Plaintiff and against Teleflex for failure to warn, awarding compensatory damages of $125,000 and punitive damages of $23 million. Teleflex appealed the verdict, and the Louisiana Third Circuit Court of Appeal affirmed.
Continue Reading Louisiana Supreme Court Holds Punitive Damages Are Available Under General Maritime Law Against Products Liability Defendant