Global Marketing Solutions, LLC v. Blue Mill Farms, Inc.
153 So. 3d 1209
| La. Ct. App. | 2014Background
- Global purchased 144 acres in Bayou Choctaw field in 2005; land allegedly contaminated by drilling since 1937.
- Global never owned mineral rights; mineral leases severed decades earlier and defendants were lessees at various times.
- Global filed damages suit in 2006 alleging negligence, strict liability, and contract-based restoration obligations.
- District court denied some exceptions and granted summary judgments; rulings relied on Marin and Eagle Pipe developments.
- Supreme Court remanded after Eagle Pipe; on remand, district court again granted summary judgment in favor of defendants in 2013.
- Global appeals asserting multiple theories; appellate court upheld summary judgment, applying Eagle Pipe interpretation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Eagle Pipe’s subsequent purchaser rule bars action against lessees. | Global argues rule misapplied; it retained rights despite purchase. | Defendants contend only personal rights existed; no transfer of damages rights absent assignment. | Global has no right of action; Eagle Pipe applied to bar claims. |
| Whether Global possesses a real right/obligation under Art. 667 and Mineral Code 11, 134. | Global asserts real rights/obligations against defendants for remediation. | Lessees’ rights are personal; no adjacent-neighbor real-right scheme with Global. | No real rights/obligations; claims fail as to real-right theory. |
| Whether Global may sue as a remediable real/assignee under mineral leases. | Global asserts remediation rights as assignee of mineral servitude rights. | No assignment or co-ownership rights; leases do not confer such remediative rights. | No remediation rights as assignee; claims fail. |
| Whether Global is a third-party beneficiary of the mineral leases. | Global seeks third-party beneficiary status to enforce remediation rights. | No recorded stipulation pour autri or language granting beneficiary status exists. | Global not a third-party beneficiary; no enforceable rights. |
| Whether the conduct constitutes a continuing tort giving a live claim after purchase. | Contamination constitutes ongoing tort despite lease termination. | Causative conduct ceased with lease term; ongoing damage does not equal continuing tort. | Not a continuing tort; conduct ceased when leases terminated. |
Key Cases Cited
- Eagle Pipe & Supply, Inc. v. Amerada Hess Corp., 79 So.3d 246 (La. 2011) (subsequent purchaser rule and real vs. personal rights analysis)
- Marin v. Exxon Mobil Corp., 48 So.3d 234 (La. 2010) (rights under expired leases; continuing tort analysis aligned with Eagle Pipe)
- Magnolia Coal Terminal v. Phillips Oil Co., 576 So.2d 475 (La.1991) (distinguishable; emphasizes rights arising from original lease when linked to agreement)
- Andrepont v. Acadia Drilling Co., 231 So.2d 347 (La.1969) (recording/third-party interests in mineral leases; effect on third-party rights)