Wiltz v. BAYER CROPSCIENCE, LTD. PARTNERSHIP
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 13172
| 5th Cir. | 2011Background
- Louisiana crawfish industry declined after rice seed coated with ICON purportedly damaged crawfish crops.
- Wiltz and Beaucoup Crawfish sue Bayer under the Louisiana Products Liability Act for economic loss arising from the alleged product defect.
- Plaintiffs argue they play an integrated role with farmers and suffer economic harm when ICON harmed crawfish supply.
- District court granted summary judgment for Bayer: economic loss not accompanied by personal or property damage cannot be recovered.
- Louisiana Phillips litigation involved similar claims; state appellate panels split on applying a duty-risk framework versus a proprietary-interest test.
- Court applies PPG-based duty-risk framework to LPLA claims and mirrors the policy-based limitation on economic losses.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether economic loss rule bars LPLA recovery | Wiltz/Beaucoup: no direct injury to person/property but economic loss should be recoverable. | Bayer: economic loss without personal/property damage is barred under rule. | Yes; economic loss barred. |
| Whether PPG duty-risk analysis applies to LPLA claims | PPG analysis governs liability and causation in LPLA claims. | APPLYING PPG is appropriate to determine duty under LPLA. | PPG duty-risk applies to LPLA claims. |
| Whether ease-of-association supports recovery | Damaged crawfish industry easily associated with plaintiffs' economic loss. | Association is too attenuated; forecasted impact is insufficient for duty. | No; insufficient ease of association. |
| Whether enforceable contracts change outcome | Existence of contracts would show certainty in purchase; absence shouldn't doom recovery. | Even with contracts, policy cautions against broad economic-liability extend. | No; absence of enforceable contracts does not allow recovery. |
| Whether to certify a question to Louisiana Supreme Court | Certification would resolve unsettled issues about proprietary interest. | Existing Louisiana decisions resolve the issue; certification unnecessary. | No compelling reason to certify. |
Key Cases Cited
- Robins Dry Dock & Repair Co. v. Flint, 275 U.S. 303 (Supreme Court, 1927) (economic-loss claims generally not recoverable in tort)
- E. River S.S. Corp. v. Transamerica Delaval, Inc., 476 U.S. 858 (Supreme Court, 1986) (foreseeability not sole brake on liability; policy considerations matter)
- PPG Industries, Inc. v. Bean Dredging, 447 So.2d 1059 (La. 1984) (duty-risk policy limits recovery for purely economic loss)
- Roberts v. Benoit, 605 So.2d 1032 (La. 1991) (duty-risk analysis melds policy and foreseeability in Louisiana tort law)
- Great Southwest Fire Ins. Co. v. CNA Ins. Cos., 557 So.2d 966 (La. 1990) (limits on expanding tort duties to protect contracts and third parties)