Trusdale v. Mountain Productions, Inc.
Civil Action No. 2017-0557
| D.D.C. | Nov 22, 2017Background
- On June 30, 2015, James L. Truesdale, a day laborer employed by Conder, Inc., fell while helping build a concert stage at RFK Stadium and later died; his daughter sued Mountain Productions, Inc. (Mountain), It’s My Party, Inc. (IMP), and others for negligence.
- IMP removed the case to federal court; Mountain and IMP each filed third-party complaints against Conder seeking indemnification for any liability to Plaintiff.
- IMP alleges an oral agreement with Conder under which Conder would supply vetted, supervised employees and indemnify IMP and add IMP as an additional insured; IMP also alleges a longstanding working relationship with Conder.
- Mountain alleges it contracted with IMP for staging and (on information and belief) that IMP contracted with Conder; Mountain claims to be an intended third-party beneficiary and also asserts implied indemnity based on day-to-day interaction.
- Conder moved to dismiss both third-party complaints under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), arguing the exclusivity of the D.C. Workers’ Compensation Act (WCA) bars third-party indemnity claims except in narrow circumstances.
- The Court granted Conder’s motion as to Mountain but denied it as to IMP: IMP plausibly pleaded both an express indemnity agreement and a special relationship supporting implied indemnity; Mountain did not plead facts showing intended third-party beneficiary status or the requisite special relationship.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether an express indemnification agreement against Conder was plausibly pleaded | IMP: orally agreed Conder would indemnify IMP and add IMP as additional insured; alleges specific contract terms and breach | Conder: no written indemnity; allegations lack required particularity | Held: IMP plausibly pleaded an express oral indemnity; claim survives pleading-stage challenge |
| Whether Mountain plausibly pleaded third-party beneficiary status to enforce IMP–Conder contract | Mountain: as IMP’s staging contractor, Mountain was an intended beneficiary of IMP’s contract with Conder | Conder: Mountain pleaded only temporal/concurrent work; no intent to benefit Mountain shown | Held: Mountain failed to plausibly plead intended third-party beneficiary status; dismissal granted |
| Whether an implied indemnity (special relationship) claim survives WCA exclusivity | IMP: longstanding, ongoing relationship with Conder created distinct duties (vetting, supervision) giving rise to implied indemnity | Conder: WCA exclusivity bars third-party indemnity unless narrow special-relationship or express contract exists | Held: IMP pleaded facts akin to an ongoing, day-to-day contractual relationship—implied indemnity plausibly alleged; Mountain’s allegations were too thin and analogous to Myco and were dismissed |
| Whether WCA exclusivity bars third-party indemnity claims generally | N/A | Conder: WCA makes employer liability exclusive, precluding third-party indemnity except for express indemnity or special legal relationships | Held: Court applied Myco exception—WCA exclusivity can be overcome by express indemnity or a defined special relationship; applied to IMP but not to Mountain |
Key Cases Cited
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (standards for pleading plausibility)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (pleading requirements and plausibility standard)
- Myco, Inc. v. Super Concrete Co., 565 A.2d 293 (D.C. 1989) (WCA exclusivity bars third-party indemnity except for express indemnity or special legal relationships)
- Howard Univ. v. Good Food Servs., Inc., 608 A.2d 116 (D.C. 1992) (ongoing day-to-day contractual relationship can support implied indemnity despite WCA)
- Murray v. Lichtman, 339 F.2d 749 (D.C. Cir. 1964) (oral indemnity agreement may be enforceable)
- In re Fort Totten Metrorail Cases Arising Out of the Events of June 22, 2009, 808 F. Supp. 2d 154 (D.D.C. 2011) (dismissing indemnity claim where relationship resembled Myco)