Mayeaux Jr. v. Taylor-Seidenbach, Inc.
2:16-cv-16813
E.D. La.Aug 15, 2017Background
- Plaintiff George K. Mayeaux Jr. worked at Avondale from 1963–2009 and alleges asbestos exposure aboard U.S. Navy Destroyer Escorts and at Avondale, causing mesothelioma; he sued in Louisiana state court asserting negligence against Avondale (and others).
- Avondale (Huntington Ingalls and related entities/insurer) removed under 28 U.S.C. § 1442(a)(1) (federal officer removal), asserting it acted under federal direction while building Navy ships and raising colorable federal defenses (government-contractor immunity under Boyle and LHWCA preemption).
- Plaintiff moved to remand, arguing Avondale cannot meet Mesa/Bartel/Savoie causal-nexus and colorable-defense requirements for federal-officer removal and that LHWCA does not independently support removal.
- Parties filed multiple supplemental briefs; Avondale relied on the 2011 amendment to § 1442 and Fifth Circuit decisions (including Zeringue) to argue broader removal scope; Plaintiff relied on Bartel, Savoie, and factual evidence that the Navy did not control Avondale’s safety practices.
- The district court framed the controlling inquiry under Fifth Circuit three-part test: (1) person, (2) acted under federal officer with causal nexus to plaintiff’s claims, and (3) colorable federal defense; only negligence claims were asserted against Avondale.
- The Court held Avondale satisfied the “person” prong but failed the causal-nexus requirement for negligence claims (no evidence the government controlled Avondale’s safety/warning decisions); remand granted to state court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether federal-officer removal under 28 U.S.C. § 1442(a)(1) applies | Mayeaux: Avondale cannot show it acted under direct federal control or a causal nexus for negligence claims; removal improper | Avondale: § 1442 (as amended) permits removal for suits "for or relating to" acts under color of federal office; contracts, specs, and oversight suffice | Denied: removal improper — Avondale failed to show causal nexus for negligence claims |
| Whether Avondale has a colorable government-contractor (Boyle) defense | Mayeaux: No conflict between federal specs and state duties; defense is not colorable here | Avondale: Boyle defense is plausible because specs/inspections demonstrate approved specifications and compliance | Court did not reach merits because causal-nexus failure was dispositive (Avondale did not carry burden) |
| Whether the LHWCA provides an independent basis for removal or preempts state tort claims | Mayeaux: LHWCA supplements state remedies and does not independently support removal; plaintiff did not elect LHWCA benefits | Avondale: Plaintiff was maritime/shipbuilding employee satisfying situs/status; LHWCA preempts state torts for those exposures | Court rejected § 1442 removal; did not find LHWCA preemption sufficient to establish federal jurisdiction in this posture |
| Effect of 2011 amendment to § 1442 on causal-nexus requirement | Mayeaux: Amendment does not eliminate preexisting causal-nexus showing; defendants must still show direct/detailed connection | Avondale: Amendment broadened scope to "relating to," lowering the causal-nexus threshold; removal is appropriate | Court held amendment did not dispense with causal-nexus need; Fifth Circuit precedent (Bartel, Savoie, Zeringue) still requires showing linking federal directives to challenged conduct |
Key Cases Cited
- Mesa v. California, 489 U.S. 121 (1989) (federal-officer removal principles and purposes)
- Boyle v. United Techs. Corp., 487 U.S. 500 (1988) (government-contractor immunity test)
- Watson v. Philip Morris Cos., 551 U.S. 142 (2007) (broad interpretation of § 1442’s purposes)
- Winters v. Diamond Shamrock Chem. Co., 149 F.3d 387 (5th Cir. 1998) (Fifth Circuit three-part contractor removal test)
- Bartel v. Alcoa S.S. Co., 805 F.3d 169 (5th Cir. 2015) (negligence/failure-to-warn claims require showing government caused shipyard’s safety decisions)
- Savoie v. Huntington Ingalls Inc., 817 F.3d 457 (5th Cir. 2016) (government mandate of asbestos did not cause shipyard’s alleged negligence; causal nexus lacking)
- Zeringue v. Crane Co., 846 F.3d 785 (5th Cir. 2017) (2011 § 1442 amendment expanded reach but did not eliminate causal-nexus requirement)