Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal; January 13, 1987; Louisiana; State Appellate Court
Electro-Coal Transfer Corp. (Electro-Coal) appeals the district court's summary judgment in favor of co-defendant Boh Bros. Construction Co., Inc. (Boh Bros.). The case stems from an incident in June 1982, where Thomas A. Edmonds, an employee of Boh Bros., was injured during dock construction at Electro-Coal's facility. Edmonds alleged that Electro-Coal's tugboat caused a wake that led to his fall from a barge. Following the incident, Electro-Coal filed a third-party demand against Boh Bros. for indemnification and contribution, arguing it was entitled to recover any judgment due to Boh Bros.' alleged negligence.
After Edmonds settled his claims against Boh Bros. in July 1983, Boh Bros. sought and was granted summary judgment in October 1985, dismissing Electro-Coal’s third-party demand. Electro-Coal contends that the trial court erred, asserting that a genuine issue of material fact exists regarding Edmonds’ employment status, which is crucial for determining indemnification rights. Additionally, Electro-Coal claims Boh Bros. was contractually obligated to indemnify it based on their agreement, which stipulates Boh Bros. would hold Electro-Coal harmless only for claims arising from its own negligence.
The court disagreed, concluding that Electro-Coal is being sued for its own negligence related to the operation of its tug, not Boh Bros. Therefore, the indemnity clause does not apply. Furthermore, the court rejected Electro-Coal's argument under the active-passive tort theory, stating that both the State Workers’ Compensation Act and the Jones Act do not mandate such indemnification obligations for third-party injuries.
In Loose v. Offshore Navigation Inc., the court questioned the relevance of the active-passive indemnification rule within a comparative fault system, asserting that it undermines the assessment of damages based on each party's degree of responsibility. The court agreed with Boh Bros. that the appellant could not claim indemnity under the active-passive theory and should instead argue its liability based solely on its own negligence. The ruling aligns with Louisiana Workers' Compensation law, which holds each party accountable for their share of liability.
Electro-Coal's argument for indemnity from Boh Bros., claiming Edmonds' status as a longshoreman or harbor worker, was also considered. The court referenced Lockheed Aircraft Corp. v. United States, where the Supreme Court allowed a third party to pursue indemnity despite FECA’s exclusivity, but distinguished it due to different statutory schemes and public policies. The Johnston case further clarified that Lockheed’s ruling did not affect Section 905(a) of the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (LHWCA).
Ultimately, the court concluded that even if Edmonds were deemed a longshoreman or harbor worker, Electro-Coal would still not be entitled to indemnification from Boh Bros. The trial court’s judgment was affirmed, solidifying that Electro-Coal has no basis for indemnity regardless of Edmonds' employment status.
Liability of an employer under section 904 is exclusive, replacing all other potential liabilities to employees and their relatives for injuries or death, unless the employer fails to secure required compensation payments. In such cases, the injured employee or their legal representative may choose to seek compensation under the chapter or pursue legal action for damages. In these legal actions, the employer cannot defend themselves by claiming that a fellow employee's negligence caused the injury, that the employee assumed risks, or that the employee contributed to their own injury. Additionally, a contractor is considered the employer of a subcontractor's employees only if the subcontractor does not secure compensation payments as mandated.
