C. P. GREEN and Marjorie Green v. TACA INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES and United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company
No. 54768
Supreme Court of Louisiana
December 2, 1974
304 So. 2d 357
MARCUS, Justice.
A. R. Christovich, Jr., Christovich & Kearney, New Orleans, for defendant-respondеnt, Taca International Airlines.
Richard E. Gerard, Jr., Scofield, Bergstedt & Gerard, Lake Charles, for plaintiffs-respondents.
MARCUS, Justice.
This is a suit by Mr. and Mrs. C. P. Green against Taca International Airlines [hereinafter referred to as TACA] and United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company [hereinafter referred to as USF&G]. Plaintiffs seek to recover general and special damages for Mrs. Green‘s physical injuries arising from her slip and fall while preparing to board a TACA aircraft at Moissant International Airport in Jefferson Parish, Louisiana. USF&G is the public liability insurer оf the New Orleans Aviation Board, which is an agency of the City of New Orleans charged with the operation and maintenance of the airport. It denies liability and alternatively seeks indemnity frоm TACA by third party demand
The trial court found both defendants jointly liable, awarding Mrs. Green $7,500.00 for her personal injuries (which consist primarily of aggravation of a pre-existing arthritic condition in the neck, back and right hip) and Mr. Green $838.00 for his wife‘s medical expenses. Both third party demands were dismissed. Both defendants appealed. The court of appeal affirmed the award in plaintiffs’ favor and the trial court‘s dismissal of USF&G‘s third party demаnd against TACA, but reversed that portion of the judgment dismissing TACA‘s third party demand against the Aviation Board and awarded TACA full indemnity for its liability to plaintiffs. Green v. Taca International Airlines, 293 So. 2d 198 (La.App. 4th Cir. 1974). Upon the application of the Aviation Board and USF&G, we granted certiorari. 294 So. 2d 822 (La.1974).
The facts giving risе to this controversy are not in serious dispute. The accident in question occurred at approximately 5:45 a. m. on February 22, 1970, while Mr. and Mrs. Green were preparing to board TACA Flight No. 111 to Guatеmala, which departed from Moissant Airport. It was dark at the time. The aircraft was parked on the landing apron approximately 120 feet from the gate leading from the passengеr waiting room. The unusually long distance from the gate to the aircraft was due to the presence of two other aircraft, which were also parked at the same gate. Mr. and Mrs. Greеn had checked through the ticket agent at the boarding gate and were following a string of other passengers, who were boarding the same aircraft, when Mrs. Green suddenly fell to the concrete, injuring herself.
The cause of the fall was a hole in the concrete approximately nine inches by four inches by two inches deep, with a metal loop in the center, and vаriously referred to as a “safety ground installation,” “tie ring area,” or “padeye.” The purpose of safety ground installations is to ground fueling trucks while servicing aircraft and thus prevent static electrical ignition of the fuel. The Federal Aviation Administration requires safety ground installations in all ramp construction. Thus, the apron adjacent to the passenger terminal containеd many such indentations. Although the safety ground installations are ordinarily painted with yellow traffic paint for easy detection, the paint on the indentation that caused Mrs. Green‘s fall had substantiаlly worn away and needed repainting.
The sole issue before us is whether TACA is entitled to full indemnity or is limited to its right to contribution from the Aviation Board as a joint tortfeasor. Indemnity shifts the entire loss from a tоrt-feasor only technically or constructively at fault to one primarily responsible for the act that caused the damage. Appalachian Corp. v. Brooklyn Cooperаge Co., 151 La. 41, 91 So. 539 (1922); see also Lee v. City of Baton Rouge, 243 La. 850, 147 So. 2d 868 (1963); Second Church of Christ, Scientist v. Spencer, 230 La. 432, 88 So. 2d 810 (1956). Contribution apportions the loss among joint tortfeasors and requires each to pаy his virile share of the damages that result from the wrong.
The duty owed by a common carrier in Louisiana to its passengers is stringent, whether it be termed “the highest
The New Orleans Aviation Board was charged with the duty of maintaining the landing aprons of the airport. Its neglect to paint the safety ground installations with sufficient rеgularity so as to be visible to those using that area of the terminal was a breach of its duty of maintenance. This negligence contributed to the cause of the accident, and the Aviation Board is responsible for whatever damage was caused thereby.
Both parties having been actively and concurrently at fault, the rule of contribution between joint tortfeasors ordinarily applies.
The Aviation Board argues that the first clause of the indemnity agreemеnt requires the indemnitor (TACA) to indemnify fully the indemnitee (Aviation Board), without any express statement of assumption of indemnitee‘s
Agreements have the effect of law between the parties, and the courts are bound to give effect to all such contracts according to the true intent of the parties. That intent is determined by the words of the contract when they are clear аnd explicit.
For the reasons assigned, the judgment of the court of appeal is reversed, and the judgment of the district court is reinstated.
Notes
(Emphasis added.)Lessee agrees fully to indemnify, and save and hold harmless, the said Lessor from and against all claims and actions and all expenses incidental to the investigation and defense thereof, based upon or arising out of damages or injuries to persons or properly, caused by the fault or negligence of Lessee, its agents or employees, in the use or occupancy of the said leased premises by Lessee; provided, however, that Lessee shall not be liable for any injury or damage or loss occasioned by the negligence of Lessor, its agents or еmployees; and provided further that Lessor shall give to Lessee prompt and reasonable notice of any such claims or actions and Lessee shall have the right to investigate, compromise and defend the same. Lessee agrees to carry, and keep in force, public liability insurance covering personal injury and property damage, and such оther insurance as may be necessary to protect Lessor herein from such claims and actions aforesaid. Without limiting its liability as aforesaid Lessee agrees to carry and keep in force such insurance with limits of liability for personal injury in a sum not less than $100,000.00 for any one person and $1,000,000.00 for any one accident; and for the property damage in a sum of not less than $500,000.00; and to furnish Lessor with proper certificate certifying that such insurance is in force.