Morvant v. Oil States International, Inc.
3 F. Supp. 3d 561
E.D. La.2014Background
- Morvant, a 15-year OSSS employee, died in a work-related incident while fabricating a wall component of a winch at OSSS’s Houma facility.
- Plaintiffs, Morvant’s spouse, children, and estate, brought suit in the Southern District of Texas alleging negligence by OSI and International for failing to manage, supervise, and direct OSSS’s safety, not naming OSSS.
- The case was transferred to this district; discovery and motions for summary judgment were filed by OSI and International.
- OSI and International sought summary judgment: (1) on punitive damages and estate claims; (2) on all claims, arguing no duty owed to Morvant.
- Plaintiffs opposed both motions; motions were fully briefed and argued.
- The core issue is whether OSI and/or International owed a duty to Morvant under Restatement § 324A and, if so, whether that duty was breached and caused the death; and, in the punitive damages context, which state’s law governs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether OSI or International owed a duty to Morvant under § 324A | OSI undertook safety duties and controlled OSSS policies. | Parent did not owe a duty by ownership alone. | Genuine issue of material fact as to § 324A duty owed by OSI; no duty found for International. |
| Whether OSI's duty was breached and proximately caused Morvant's death | OSI's involvement and control over OSSS safety policies breach duty. | No breach established under § 324A or causal link. | Issue for trial; evidence supports potential breach and causation under § 324A as to OSI. |
| Whether punitive damages survive under Texas or Louisiana law | Conflicting state law; punitive damages potentially allowed. | Choice-of-law should align with Texas or applicable law. | Louisiana law applied for punitive damages; claims dismissed. |
| Whether Morvant’s estate may pursue wrongful death and survival actions | Estate may pursue under Texas law; conflicts considered. | Louisiana law governs survival/wrongful death. | Louisiana law applies; estate has no wrongful death or survival claims against defendants. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bujol v. Entergy Servs., Inc., 922 So.2d 1113 (La.2004) (restatement §324A framework; parent undertaking and duty factors)
- Little v. Delta Steel, Inc., 409 S.W.3d 704 (Tex.App.2013) (parent’s safety undertakings may create duty under §324A)
- Muniz v. National Can Corp., 737 F.2d 145 (1st Cir.1984) (parent’s safety involvement not enough; general guidelines insufficient)
- Johnson v. Abbe Eng’g Co., 749 F.2d 1131 (5th Cir.1984) (§324A predicates; reliance and undertakings vs. duty)
- In re Educ. Testing Serv. Praxis Principles of Learning & Teaching: Grades 7-12 Litig., 517 F.Supp.2d 832 (E.D.La.2007) (restatement §145/§6 framework in choice-of-law for punitive damages)
- Schneider Nat’l Transp. v. Ford Motor Co., 280 F.3d 532 (5th Cir.2002) (no choice-of-law analysis required where no conflict on issue)