Endurance American Insurance Co v. Cheyenne Partners L L C
6:20-cv-00571
W.D. La.Mar 16, 2023Background
- On December 28, 2019, a Piper airplane crashed after takeoff in Lafayette, LA, killing the pilot and four passengers; several survivors and witnesses (Cross-Claimants) sued various entities and individuals connected to the aircraft.
- The Piper was owned by Cheyenne Partners, LLC (members Eagle Air and SLD Aircraft); RRCo Aircraft (owned in part by Rodney Savoy and Robert Gagnard) was a member of SLD Aircraft. The pilot and passengers were affiliated with Global Data Systems, Inc. (GDS).
- QBE issued an aircraft policy to RRCo Aircraft, Robert Gagnard, and Rodney Savoy. The policy scheduled a different aircraft (King Air N303RR) but included Coverage 2 (liability for use of non‑owned aircraft; excess) and Coverage 4 (liability for charter referral), which potentially expand coverage beyond the scheduled aircraft.
- Cross‑Claimants alleged, among other things, that defendants conspired to operate the Piper in violation of Federal Aviation Regulations and that the single business enterprise/alter‑ego theories render QBE’s named insureds liable.
- QBE moved (1) for partial summary judgment to dismiss all Civil Code Article 2324 conspiracy claims and (2) for summary judgment declaring no coverage under the QBE policy.
- The court: (a) GRANTED QBE’s motion to dismiss the Article 2324 civil conspiracy claims because plaintiffs offered no evidence of an agreement to intentionally cause the crash; and (b) DEFERRED QBE’s coverage motion to trial (or post‑trial) because factual disputes—especially regarding the single business enterprise theory, use/arrangement for the non‑owned aircraft, and credibility issues—prevented a ruling as a matter of law.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of Article 2324 civil conspiracy claims | Cross‑Claimants: defendants agreed to intentionally/willfully operate the Piper in violation of FARs, causing the crash | QBE: no evidence any defendant agreed to intentionally cause the crash; Article 2324 requires agreement as to the intended tortious result | Granted for QBE — conspiracy claims dismissed for lack of evidence of agreement to cause the accident |
| Coverage under QBE policy (Coverage 2 & 4) | Cross‑Claimants: policy language and factual matrix (shared use, affiliated entities) support coverage if QBE named insureds are found liable (including under single business enterprise) | QBE: no coverage because the scheduled aircraft was a different plane and policy language does not extend to this crash | Deferred — factual and credibility disputes (including single business enterprise/alter‑ego issues and whether use/arrangement arose from a named insured) preclude summary judgment; coverage reserved for trial/post‑trial motion practice |
Key Cases Cited
- Quality Infusion Care, Inc. v. Health Care Serv. Corp., 628 F.3d 725 (5th Cir. 2010) (summary judgment standard)
- Patrick v. Ridge, 394 F.3d 311 (5th Cir. 2004) (burden on movant/nonmovant at summary judgment)
- Gen. Universal Sys., Inc. v. Lee, 379 F.3d 131 (5th Cir. 2004) (nonmovant must designate specific facts to create fact issue)
- Streber v. Hunter, 221 F.3d 701 (5th Cir. 2000) (partial summary judgment is a pretrial adjudication)
- Calpetco 1981 v. Marshall Exploration, Inc., 989 F.2d 1408 (5th Cir. 1993) (purpose of partial summary judgment in narrowing issues)
- Able Sec. & Patrol, LLC v. State of La., 569 F. Supp. 2d 617 (E.D. La. 2008) (no independent cause of action for civil conspiracy under Louisiana law; actionable element is the underlying intentional tort)
- Ross v. Conoco, Inc., 828 So.2d 546 (La. 2002) (Article 2324 actionable element is the intentional tort conspirators agreed to commit)
- Elliott v. Continental Cas. Co., 949 So.2d 1247 (La. 2007) (coverage summary judgment not appropriate if a reasonable interpretation of the policy could afford coverage)