Roland Guillory v. Humble Oil & Refining Company

Fifth Circuit

Roland Guillory v. Humble Oil & Refining Company

453 F.2d 886, 1972 A.M.C. 737, 41 Oil & Gas Rep. 492, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 11914

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 10, 1972

Docket29845

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 453 F.2d 886 (Roland Guillory v. Humble Oil & Refining Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Roland Guillory v. Humble Oil & Refining Company, 453 F.2d 886, 1972 A.M.C. 737, 41 Oil & Gas Rep. 492, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 11914 (5th Cir. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Roland Guillory brought this suit on January 15, 1968, for personal injuries, which he alleged were sustained on December 18, 1965 while working on a fixed offshore drilling platform of defendant Humble Oil & Refining Company located on the Outer Continental Shelf in the Gulf of Mexico off the Louisiana coast.

Defendant Humble filed a motion to dismiss the suit on the ground that under the one-year prescriptive period provided for by Louisiana law (Article 3536, LSA-C.C.) the suit was filed beyond the statutory period of limitations. The District Judge granted the motion to dismiss, D.C., 310 F.Supp. 230, basing his decision on the recent Supreme Court decision in Rodrigue v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Company, 395 U.S. 352, 89 S.Ct. 1835, 23 L.Ed.2d 360 (decided June 9, 1969), which the Trial Court held required the application of the Louisiana one-year prescriptive period thus barring this suit. The Trial Judge declined to restrict the holding in Rodrigue to a prospective effect as requested by appellant Guillory.

The Supreme Court in the latest case on the subject, Chevron Oil Co. v. Huson, 404 U.S. 97, 92 S.Ct. 349, 30 L.Ed.2d 296 (decided December 6, 1971), said, however, in a matter involving the identical principle of law, that “a weigh *887 ing of the equities requires nonretroac-tive application of the state statute of limitations here.” Id., 404 U.S. at 109, 92 S.Ct. at 356. In the present case the injuries were sustained and suit was filed prior to the decision in Rodrigue. Thus, according to the prospective application rule announced in Huson, the suit has not prescribed under the Louisiana statute.

Accordingly, the judgment of the District Court is erroneous and must be reversed and the case remanded for further proceedings.

Reversed and remanded.

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

PER CURIAM:

Roland Guillory brought this suit on January 15, 1968, for personal injuries, which he alleged were sustained on December 18, 1965 while working on a fixed offshore drilling platform of defendant Humble Oil & Refining Company located on the Outer Continental Shelf in the Gulf of Mexico off the Louisiana coast.

Defendant Humble filed a motion to dismiss the suit on the ground that under the one-year prescriptive period provided for by Louisiana law (Article 3536, LSA-C.C.) the suit was filed beyond the statutory period of limitations. The District Judge granted the motion to dismiss, D.C., 310 F.Supp. 230, basing his decision on the recent Supreme Court decision in Rodrigue v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Company, 395 U.S. 352, 89 S.Ct. 1835, 23 L.Ed.2d 360 (decided June 9, 1969), which the Trial Court held required the application of the Louisiana one-year prescriptive period thus barring this suit. The Trial Judge declined to restrict the holding in Rodrigue to a prospective effect as requested by appellant Guillory.

The Supreme Court in the latest case on the subject, Chevron Oil Co. v. Huson, 404 U.S. 97, 92 S.Ct. 349, 30 L.Ed.2d 296 (decided December 6, 1971), said, however, in a matter involving the identical principle of law, that “a weigh *887 ing of the equities requires nonretroac-tive application of the state statute of limitations here.” Id., 404 U.S. at 109, 92 S.Ct. at 356. In the present case the injuries were sustained and suit was filed prior to the decision in Rodrigue. Thus, according to the prospective application rule announced in Huson, the suit has not prescribed under the Louisiana statute.

Accordingly, the judgment of the District Court is erroneous and must be reversed and the case remanded for further proceedings.

Reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

453 F.2d 886, 1972 A.M.C. 737, 41 Oil & Gas Rep. 492, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 11914, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roland-guillory-v-humble-oil-refining-company-ca5-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack