HONTEX ENTERPRISES v. City of Westwego

833 So. 2d 1234, 2002 WL 31761220
CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal
DecidedDecember 11, 2002
Docket02-CA-506, 02-CA-507
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 833 So. 2d 1234 (HONTEX ENTERPRISES v. City of Westwego) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
HONTEX ENTERPRISES v. City of Westwego, 833 So. 2d 1234, 2002 WL 31761220 (La. Ct. App. 2002).

Opinion

833 So.2d 1234 (2002)

HONTEX ENTERPRISES, INC.
v.
CITY OF WESTWEGO, Parish of Jefferson and West Jefferson Levee District, Board of Commissioners.
D.R.S. Trading Co., Inc. and Indemnity Insurance of North America
v.
Louisiana Packing Company, Inc., Hontex Enterprises Inc., The City of Westwego, The Parish of Jefferson and the West Jefferson Levee District, Board of Commissioners.

Nos. 02-CA-506, 02-CA-507.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fifth Circuit.

December 11, 2002.
Rehearing Denied January 16, 2003.

Darryl J. Carimi, Carimi Law Firm A Law Corporation, Metairie, LA, Attorneys for Plaintiff/Appellant, Hontex Enterprises, Inc.

*1235 John J. Molaison, Jr., Gretna, LA, Attorney for Defendant/Appellee, City of Westwego.

Christian B. Bogart, Kevin R. Derham, Duplass, Zwain, Bourgeois & Morton, Metairie, LA, Attorneys for Defendant/Appellee, West Jefferson Levee District, Board of Commissioners.

Darnell Bludworth, Christopher T. Chocheles, Sher Garner Cahill Richter Klein McAlister & Hilbert, L.L.C., New Orleans, LA, Attorneys for Plaintiffs/2nd Appellants, D.R.S. Trading Co., Inc. and Indemnity Insurance Company of North America.

Bruce A. North, David L. Colvin & Associates, Gretna, LA, Attorney for Defendant/Appellee, Parish of Jefferson.

Panel composed of Judges THOMAS F. DALEY, MARION F. EDWARDS, and SUSAN M. CHEHARDY.

THOMAS F. DALEY, Judge.

The plaintiffs, Hontex Enterprises, Inc. (Hontex) and D.R.S. Trading Co., Inc., and Indemnity Insurance Company of North America, (hereinafter referred to collectively as D.R.S.), have appealed the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendants.

FACTS:

In September 1998, Tropical Storm Frances sat in the Gulf of Mexico for several days pushing an enormous amount of water into the bayous and canals of the west bank of Jefferson Parish. On September 9, 1998, the Parish President declared a state of emergency in the parish. Hontex operated a shrimp processing plant outside the hurricane protection levee system in the City of Westwego on the banks of Bayou Segnette. Hontex allegedly had three million dollars worth of frozen seafood in its freezers. The plant flooded and the seafood was lost. D.R.S. owned $106,000.00 of the frozen seafood. Hontex and D.R.S. filed individual lawsuits against Jefferson Parish, the City of Westwego, and the West Jefferson Levee District, claiming that their actions caused the plant to flood and the damage to the seafood. The suits were consolidated. All defendants filed motions for summary judgment that were granted by the trial court. Following the denial of plaintiffs' motion for new trial, Hontex and D.R.S. filed devolutive appeals. These appeals were consolidated.

The Hontex plant is accessed via a road that goes over a lower portion (gap) in the hurricane levee. As the water in bayou rose, the Hontex property began to take on water. On September 12, 1998, employees of Hontex called the city for sandbags and assistance in placing the sandbags along the banks of the bayou. The city responded and assisted Hontex employees in placing sandbags along the bank of the bayou. As the water continued to rise, the gap in the hurricane levee was filled with mud.

Hontex operates a pump station that pumps water from the plant grounds under the City of Westwego into the Mississippi River. This pump station is on the other side of the hurricane protection levee from the plant, that is, the pump station itself is located within the hurricane protection system within the levee system. A pipe from this system was spilling water onto the property adjacent to the plant. In response to a complaint from the adjacent landowner, employees of the city investigated the situation. The decision was made to build a ring levee around the pipe that was leaking water. The plaintiffs allege that the building of the ring levee around the pump station caused the pump station to flood and become inoperable. This in turn caused the plant to flood to such an extent that the compressors for *1236 the freezers became submerged in water and shorted out. The plaintiffs further allege that the act of filling the gap in the levee prevented them from accessing the plant to bring in trucks with carbon dioxide to keep the shrimp frozen.

In their motions for summary judgment, the defendants argue that they are immune from liability for their actions taken during this declared state of emergency. They contend that La. R.S. 29:735 affords them immunity from all acts taken due to the state of emergency. While they acknowledge that the statute provides for an exception to the immunity if there is willful or malicious conduct on the part of the state agency, they contend there is absolutely no indication of any willful or malicious conduct. They further argue that they are immune from liability for all acts taken that are discretionary in nature under La. R.S. 9:2798.1. They contend that they had no choice but to close the gap in the levee because the water from Bayou Segnette was entering the city through the gap. They contend that even if the Hontex pump would not have become inoperable, the pump would not have been able to keep up with the rain and rising bayou and the plant would have flooded any way. In addition, the City of Westwego argues the flooding was caused by an act of God over which they had no control.

In support of their position, the defendants attached the depositions of numerous people who were present at the Hontex facility on September 12, 1998.

Mr. Edward Lee, the majority shareholder and president of Hontex testified in his deposition that he acquired the shrimp processing plant in March 1988 and he knew the property was outside of the hurricane protection levee system. He wanted this property so the shrimpers could pull their boats up to the docks at the back of his property. He explained that the plant had flooded previously but there was never a flood that caused major destruction. He did not move the inventory because there was no damage to inventory in any previous floods. He explained that the two large freezers that contained the frozen seafood were elevated eight to ten inches above the surrounding ground. He acknowledged that on September 12, 1998, there was water on the plant grounds due to seepage from the bayou and heavy rain. His employee called for sandbags and they arrived. He estimated there was about six or seven inches of water on the plant grounds. The water later entered his office but it was unclear how high the level reached. He testified that the water was higher than his ankles but at no times did it go over the top of his shrimp boots. He testified that his pump system was handling the water, it would rise and the rain would slow down and the pumps would catch up, lowering the water level.

He testified that since he acquired the property the gap in the levee had never been closed prior to Tropical Storm Frances, nor was access to his plant limited in anyway. Although, he was not present when the gap was closed on September 12 th, he testified that his employees told him that they asked the driver of the dump truck to allow them to move a large truck off the property before they dumped the mud blocking the roadway. The truck driver called someone, then proceeded to dump the mud. He explained that the mud in the roadway is not what caused his freezers to flood, rather the mud in the roadway prevented him from bringing in equipment to protect the frozen products.

Mr. Lee testified that his two water discharge pumps pump 800 gallons of water per minute each.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cooley v. Acadian Ambulance
65 So. 3d 192 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2011)
Opinion Number
Louisiana Attorney General Reports, 2008
Banks v. Parish of Jefferson
990 So. 2d 26 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2008)
Yates v. Elmer
948 So. 2d 1092 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
833 So. 2d 1234, 2002 WL 31761220, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hontex-enterprises-v-city-of-westwego-lactapp-2002.