Pontchartrain Natural Gas System, k/d/s Promix, L.L.C., and Acadian Gas Pipeline System v. Texas Brine Company, LLC ( 2022 )

STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL
FIRST CIRCUIT
2022 CA 0446
2021 CW 1266
A"'14 / I/ r7
f PONTCHARTRAIN NATURAL GAS SYSTEM, K/D/ S PROMIX, L.L.C.,
AND ACADIAN GAS PIPELINE SYSTEM
VERSUS
TEXAS BRINE COMPANY, LLC
Judgment Rendered: MT 2 4 2022
Appealed from the
23rd
Judicial District Court
In and for the Parish of Assumption
State of Louisiana
Docket Number 34,265
Honorable Thomas J. Kliebert, Jr., Ad Hoc Judge Presiding
James M. Garner Attorneys for Appellant/Defendant
Leopold Z. Sher Texas Brine Company, LLC
Peter L. Hilbert, Jr.
Darnell Bludworth
Jeffrey D. Kessler
Stuart D. Kottle
New Orleans, Louisiana
Robert Ryland Percy, III
Gonzales, Louisiana
Royce I. Duplessis
New Orleans, Louisiana
Travis J. Turner
Gonzales, Louisiana
Martin A. Stern Attorneys for Appel lants/ Defendants
Leigh Ann Schell Occidental Chemical Corporation,
Raymond P. Ward Occidental Petroleum Corporation, and
New Orleans, Louisiana OXY USA, Inc.
Kathy Patrick
Laura Kissel Cassidy
1
Caitlin Halpern
Samuel W. Cruse, III.
Houston, Texas
Richard Hymel
Lafayette, Louisiana
Brad Brian
Bethany Kristovich
Daniel Levin
Los Angeles, California
Roy C. Cheatwood Attorneys for AppelleefDefendant
Kent A. Lambert Legacy Vulcan, LLC
Adam B. Zuckerman
Colleen C. Jarrott
Matthew C. Juneau
Leopoldo J. Yanez
Lauren Brink Adams
New Orleans, Louisiana
BEFORE: THERIOT, HOLDRIDGE, AND LANIER, JJ.
2
HOLDRIDGE, J.
This dispute is one of many arising out of the August 2012 sinkhole that
appeared near Bayou Come in Assumption Parish. This appeal relates to a
challenge by Texas Brine Company, LLC of a summary judgment declaring a
lease, and other interdependent contracts, extinguished by confusion. In the
answer filed to this appeal and related request for supervisory review, Legacy
Vulcan, LLC challenges the trial court' s judgment as to the effects of those
extinguished contracts.' Occidental Chemical Corporation, Occidental Petroleum
Corporation, and Oxy USA, Inc., challenge the summary judgment' s lack of a
reservation of their right to arbitrate their contractual disputes with Texas Brine
2
including confusion of the lease at issue. The same issues were recently decided
by this court in a related appeal that originated out of a different trial court number
No. 34316, 23rd Judicial District Court, Assumption Parish), but was rendered by
the same trial court judge on the same date, concerning the same parties. See
Legacy Vulcan filed a writ, docket number 2021 CW 1266, seeking supervisory review of the
denial of its motion for summary judgment to dismiss any remaining contract claims asserted by
Texas Brine against Legacy Vulcan, which was referred to this panel for review in conjunction
with the appeal of the December 9, 2020 judgment. See order dated December 6, 2021.
2 This court has previously considered and decided the arbitration issues Occidental Chemical
Corporation, Occidental Petroleum Corporation, and. Oxy USA, Inc. ( collectively the Oxy
Parties) raise in their appeal. See Pontchartrain Natural Gas System v. Texas Brine
Company, LLC, 2018- 1249 ( La. App. 1st Cir. 12130120), 317 So. 3d 715, 745, writs denied,
2021- 00382, 2021- 00386 ( La. 618121), 317 So. 3d 323 ( wherein this court held that all claims
between the Oxy Parties and Texas Brine be submitted for determination by the arbitration
panel); and Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC v. Texas Brine Company,
LLC, 2018- 0075 ( La. App. 1st Cir. 7/ 1/ 19), 285 So. 3d 1093, 1101, writs denied, 2019- 01124
La. 7117119), 277 So. 3d 1180, 2019- 01405 ( La. 11112119), 282 So. 3d 225 ( wherein this court
held that the determination of the issue of confusion of contracts as between the Oxy Parties and
Texas Brine was appropriate for the arbitration panel rather than the trial court). Both of these
rulings are final and definitive judgments, as the Louisiana Supreme Court has denied writs of
certiorari; therefore, this is the law of the case and there is no need to reexamine these arbitration
issues. See Slaughter v. Louisiana State Employees' Retirement System, 2020- 0881 ( La.
App. 1st Cir. 3125121), 322 So. 3d 839, 845, writ denied, 2021- 00567 ( La. 6122121), 318 So. 3d
706, cert. denied, U. S. , 142 S, Ct. 775, 211 L.Ed.2d 484 ( 2022) ( the law of the case
doctrine embodies the principle that an appellate court generally does not revisit its own ruling of
law on a subsequent appeal in the same case).
3
Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC v. Texas Brine Company, LLC,
2022- 0004 ( La. App, 1st Cir. 8/ 3/ 22), -- So. 3d --, 2022 WL 3081479. 3
In Florida Gas, we affirmed the trial court' s December 9, 2020 judgment
granting Legacy Vulcan' s motion for partial summary judgment regarding
confusion of the Salt Lease and the cross -extinguishment of the Amended
Operating Agreement, the Amended Facilities Lease., and the Assignment of the
Salt Lease. We further affirmed the trial court' s denial of Legacy Vulcan' s motion
for partial summary judgment regarding any claims by Texas Brine against Legacy
Vulcan for damages arising before March 27, 2008. After a thorough review of the
record, we find no material distinctions between the evidence and arguments
asserted in this appeal and those presented in_ the Florida Gas appeal. The
substantially same background, issues, and assignments of error raised by Texas
Brine and Legacy Vulcan have already been discussed in Florida Gas, which we
are bound to follow under the " law of the circuit" doctrine that requires us to
follow our prior decisions.' Labarre v. Occidental Chemical Company, 2019-
0624 ( La. App. 1st Cir. 2/ 19/ 20), 2020 WL 813269; Pontchartrain Natural Gas
System v. Texas Brine Company, LLC, 2018- 0001 ( La. App. 1st Cir. 6/ 4118),
253 So. 3d 156, writ denied, 2018- 1124 ( La. 9128118), 253 So. 3d 147.
Following our law of the circuit doctrine, we issue this summary disposition
in accordance with Uniform Rules— Courts of Appeal, Rule 2- 16. 2( A)(2), ( 4), and
3 Texas Brine filed the same exception raising the objection of no right of action in the present
appeal as it did in Florida Gas. Because the arguments in favor and opposition to this objection
are the same here as in Florida Gas, we adopt the analysis and conclusions regarding the
objection as were set forth in Florida Gas and deny the exception raising the objection of no
right of action.
4 Although we are bound to follow the law of the circuit, it is questionable if this court has
jurisdiction to review the December 9, 2020 judgment under its appellate jurisdiction as it
appears that this partial judgment, designated as appealable under La. Code Civ. P. art. 1915( B),
only promotes piecemeal appeals, converse to the principles of judicial efficiency and economy.
See OAT Trustee, LLC as Trustee for Girod Titling Trust v. Elite Investment Group, LLC,
2021- 1402, 2021- 1551 ( La. App. Ist Cir. 7129/ 22), -- So. 3d --, 2022 WL 3010232, at * 6 ci_
tine
R.J. Messinger, Inc. v. Rosenblum, 2004- 1664 ( La. 312105), 894 So. 2d 1113, 1122.
4
b), and affirm the trial court' s December 9, 2020 judgment finding that the
obligations in the Salt Lease were extinguished as a result of confusion on March
27, 2008; finding that the Amended Operating Agreement and Amended Facilities
Lease, along with the Assignment of Salt Lease were cross -extinguished on that
same date;
and dismissing with prejudice any actions brought by Texas Brine
Company, LLC against Legacy Vulcan, LLC for damages arising after March 27,
2008, based on the aforementioned contracts.
We further affirm the trial court judgment dated August 13, 2021, denying
Legacy Vulcan' s motion for partial summary judgment regarding any claims by
Texas Brine Company, LLC against Legacy Vulcan, LLC for damages arising
before March 27, 2008, based on the aforementioned contracts.
The parties to this appeal are to bear their own costs.
JUDGMENT AFFIRMED; WRIT DENIED; EXCEPTION RAISING
THE OBJECTION OF NO RIGHT OF ACTION DENIED.
5