Cyprian Ukudi v. McMoRan Oil & Gas, L.L.C.
587 F. App'x 119
5th Cir.2014Background
- Ukudi was injured on West Cameron 294C offshore platform owned by McMoRan; the platform still contained a nonfunctional SCSSV after a prior owner installed a PB valve
- McMoRan acquired the platform in 2007 and later contracted Alliance to perform maintenance work; two “company men” oversaw the project for McMoRan
- Alliance workers attempted to remove the Christmas tree and wellhead using pins; safety concerns limited methods considered
- During operation, a defective component in the old SCSSV caused pressure buildup, ejecting a hanger pin and injuring Ukudi
- Ukudi sued McMoRan in state court for negligence; McMoRan removed to federal court and was granted summary judgment
- Court affirmed summary judgment, holding no genuine evidence of McMoRan’s negligence, no vicarious liability, and no duty-to-implement-policy liability
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether McMoRan failed to discover/repair unreasonably dangerous conditions | Ukudi asserts McMoRan knew or should have known of dangerous pressure | McMoRan did not know or should have known of the pressure buildup | No genuine knowledge-based breach; summary judgment affirmed |
| Whether McMoRan is vicariously liable for company men/Alliance | Ukudi contends operational control implied liability | Contractual/operational-control limits show no vicarious liability | No vicarious liability; operational control not established; summary judgment affirmed |
| Whether McMoRan had a duty to implement safety policies to prevent the accident | McMoRan could have mandated safer tools/methods | Contract limited duty; no later assumption of safety duties | No duty to implement policies; summary judgment affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Coulter v. Texaco, Inc., 117 F.3d 909 (5th Cir. 1997) (principal not liable for independent contractor absent ultrahazardous activity or retained control)
- Ainsworth v. Shell Offshore, Inc., 829 F.2d 548 (5th Cir. 1987) (ultrahazardous activity exception not met for offshore oil production)
- Williams v. Gervais F. Favrot Co., 499 So.2d 623 (La. App. 4th Cir. 1986) (periodic inspections illustrate lack of direct supervision)
- Fruge ex rel. Fruge v. Parker Drilling Co., 337 F.3d 558 (5th Cir. 2003) (direct supervision requirement; step-by-step control over work not shown)
- Duplantis v. Shell Offshore, Inc., 948 F.2d 187 (5th Cir. 1991) (contractual control considerations in agency/contractor relationships)
- Hemphill v. State Farm Ins. Co., 472 So.2d 320 (La. App. 3d Cir. 1985) (contract language prioritizes agreement over extent of control)
- Bass v. Daves, 753 So.2d 991 (La. App. 2d Cir.) (duty/causation considerations for safety responsibilities)