Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC v. Texas Brine Company, LLC

Opinion

STATE OF LOUISIANA

COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST CIRCUIT

NO. 2018 CA 1714

FLORIDA GAS TRANSMISSION COMPANY, LLC

VERSUS

TEXAS BRINE COMPANY, LLC

Judgment Rendered: NOV l 5 2019

On Appeal from the 23rd Judicial District Court In and for the Parish of Assumption State of Louisiana Trial Court No. 34, 316

Honorable Thomas J. Kliebert, Jr., Judge Presiding

Leopold Z. Sher Attorneys for Appellant/ Defendant, James M. Garner Third -Party Plaintiff, Peter L. Hilbert, Jr. Texas Brine Company, LLC Jeffrey D. Kessler New Orleans, LA

Travis J. Turner Gonzales, LA

Robert Ryland Percy, III Gonzales, LA

Dane S. Ciolino Metairie, LA

Joseph L. Shea, Jr. Attorneys for Appellee/ Third-Party Defendant, Katherine Smith Baker Reliance Petroleum Corporation Ashley G. Gable Joshua S. Chevallier Shreveport, LA

Matthew J. Randazzo, III Attorneys for Appellees/ Third-Party Defendants, Christopher B. Bailey LORCA Corporation and Colorado Crude Will Montz Company Lafayette, LA Frank H. Spruiell, Jr. Attorneys for Appellee/ Third-Party Defendant, Reid A. Jones Sol Kirschner Seth M. Moyers Shreveport, LA

Martin A. Stern Attorneys for Appellees/Defendants, Leigh Ann Schell Occidental Chemical Corporation, Occidental Raymond P. Ward Petroleum Corporation, Basic Chemicals Sara Valentine Company, LLC, and Occidental VCM, LLC Alexandra Roselli New Orleans, LA

Kathy Patrick Angus J. Dodson Laura Kissel Cassidy Houston, TX

BEFORE: HIGGINBOTHAM, I PENZATO, AND LANIER, JJ.

1 Judge Toni Manning Higginbotham was not present at the oral argument of this case; however, she participated in deliberations via a recording of the hearing. 2 HIGGINBOTHAM, J.

This is one of several lawsuits connected to the sinkhole litigation that

originated in Assumption Parish. Following the development of a sinkhole in

August 2012, Florida Gas Transmission Company filed suit against Texas Brine

Company, LLC, alleging Texas Brine' s salt mining operations at the OG3 brine well

caused the sinkhole and damaged Florida Gas' s nearby pipelines. Texas Brine filed

several incidental demands asserting both tort and contract claims against various

parties, including the non -operators of a nearby oil and gas well known as the AHI

well. The pertinent third -party defendant non -operators consist of Sol Kirschner,

LORCA Corporation, Colorado Crude Company, and Reliance Petroleum

Corporation and its insurer, Chicago Insurance Company.

The non -operators filed motions for summary judgment seeking dismissal of

Texas Brine' s third -party tort and contract claims. The district court granted the

motions and dismissed all of Texas Brine' s third -party tort claims against the non -

operators on August 23, 2017, and the third -party breach of contract claims against

the non -operators in a separate judgment on September 20, 2017. In this case, Texas

Brine appealed both judgments in one motion for appeal, which was granted by the

district court on June 18, 2018. This court, however, lodged the appeals separately

under docket number 2018 CA 1714 for the August 23, 2017 tort judgment and under

docket number 2018 CA 1778 for the September 20, 2017 contract judgment.

On December 20, 2018, this court, ex proprio motu, issued a Show Cause

Order concerning the apparent untimeliness of Texas Brine' s motion for devolutive

appeal of the district court' s August 23, 2017 summary judgment dismissing Texas

Brine' s tort claims against the non -operators of the AHI well. On March 22, 2019,

another panel of this court referred the show cause/ timeliness issue to this merits

panel, assigned to hear this appeal. We find that it is unnecessary to decide whether

Texas Brine' s appeal of the dismissal of its third -party tort claims against the non -

91 operators is timely, because that issue is now moot. This court recently decided in

Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC v. Texas Brine Company, LLC,

2018- 0549 ( La. App. 1st Cir. 7/ 1/ 19), 2019 WL 2723560, * 1; Crosstex Energy

Services, LP v. Texas Brine Company, LLC, 2018- 0749 ( La. App. 1st Cir.

2/ 27/ 19), 2019 WL 969564, * 1; and Pontchartrain Natural Gas System v. Texas

Brine Company, LLC, 2018- 0606 ( La. App. 1st Cir. 12/ 21/ 18), 268 So. 3d 1058,

1063- 64, writ denied, 2019- 0526 ( La. 6/ 17/ 19), 273 So. 3d 1210, that the district

court did not err in dismissing all of Texas Brine' s third -party tort claims against

each of the non -operators in the various pipeline lawsuits. After a thorough review

of the record, we find no material distinction between the evidence and arguments

asserted in each of these proceedings.

Moreover, we have determined that this particular appeal is a duplicate of

Texas Brine' s appeal filed in the above -referenced Florida Gas case, docket number

2018 CA 0549. Therefore, we dismiss this appeal under docket number 2018 CA

1714, as moot. Further, while we grant Texas Brine' s pending motion to withdraw

counsel as was done in similar sinkhole cases, we find that the rule to show cause

timeliness issue and any other pending motions in this particular appeal are also

moot. See Crosstex Energy Services v. Texas Brine Company, LLC, 2018- 1189

La. App. 1st Cir. 2/ 27/ 19), 2019 WL 966910, * 1. We issue this summary

disposition in accordance with Uniform Rules —Courts of Appeal, Rule 2- 16. 2( A)(2)

and ( 3). All costs of this appeal are assessed to Texas Brine Company, LLC.

MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED; RULE TO SHOW CAUSE, APPEAL AND ALL OTHER PENDING MOTIONS DISMISSED AS MOOT.