151 F. Supp. 3d 715
E.D. La.2015Background
- Owner (425 Notre Dame, LLC) hired Landis as general contractor for a New Orleans renovation; contract specified aluminum windows.
- Landis purchased windows from Grand Openings (distributor), which ordered manufacture from Kolbe; Southern Steel manufactured mullions/stiffeners; McInerney installed components.
- Installed windows leaked; testing showed water intrusion; Kolbe attempted repairs and refused to provide replacements.
- Notre Dame sued Kolbe and Grand Openings for negligence, redhibition (defective thing), breach of warranty, and LPLA claims; Kolbe and Grand Openings filed third-party claims against Landis, Southern Steel, and McInerney for contribution/indemnity.
- Third-party defendants moved to dismiss (and Landis alternatively moved to stay for arbitration). The court granted the motions to dismiss and denied the stay as moot.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether third-party claims for contribution/indemnity in tort survive under Louisiana law | Kolbe/Grand Openings sought indemnity/contribution for Notre Dame’s claims | Third-party defs: Louisiana’s comparative fault abolished solidarity for ordinary negligence, so no right to contribution/indemnity absent intentional/willful conduct | Dismissed — tort-based contribution/indemnity unavailable because no solidarity or intentional conduct alleged |
| Whether third-party plaintiffs can assert contractual indemnity/contribution via redhibition or implied warranty | Kolbe/Grand Openings: Landis (and others) are co-manufacturers or sellers in chain of title and thus solidarily liable under redhibition/warranty | Third-party defs: No contractual solidarity; Landis’s contract with owner is a building contract, not a sale; Southern Steel and McInerney did not sell the windows | Dismissed — no solidary obligation exists because Landis was a contractor (contract to build) not a seller in the chain of title; Southern Steel and McInerney never sellers |
| Whether a co-manufacturer theory can create solidary liability here | Kolbe/Grand Openings: Landis modified/assembled window units in field and so acted as co-manufacturer | Third-party defs: Any alleged field work occurred outside the chain of title and does not convert contractor into seller/manufacturer for redhibition | Rejected — without a sale/chain of title, co-manufacturer theory cannot impose redhibition solidarity against Landis |
| Whether arbitration should stay third-party claims | Landis: Owner–contract contains arbitration clause requiring disputes be arbitrated | Kolbe/Grand Openings: opposed; disputed forum applicability | Denied as moot — court dismissed third-party claims on the merits, so no stay required |
Key Cases Cited
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (plausibility standard for Rule 12(b)(6) pleading)
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (requirement that complaint state a plausible claim)
- Dura Pharm., Inc. v. Broudo, 544 U.S. 336 (2005) (complaint must give fair notice of claim and grounds)
- Owen Equip. & Erection Co. v. Kroger, 437 U.S. 365 (1978) (third-party practice cannot assert independent liability to plaintiff — proper only for derivative liability like indemnity/contribution)
- Aucoin v. S. Quality Homes, LLC, 984 So.2d 685 (La. 2008) (discussing seller/manufacturer solidarity in redhibition context)
- Duhon v. Three Friends Homebuilders Corp., 396 So.2d 559 (La. Ct. App. 1981) (three-factor test distinguishing contract to build from contract of sale)
- Connell v. Davis, 940 So.2d 195 (La. Ct. App. 2006) (buyer may bring redhibition only against seller)
- McCain v. Clearview Dodge Sales, Inc., 574 F.2d 848 (5th Cir. 1978) (basis for third-party defendant’s liability to third-party plaintiff required for Rule 14)