Crosstex Energy Services, LP, Crosstex LIG, LLC and Crosstex Processing Services, LLC v. Texas Brine Company, LLC ( 2023 )

STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL
FIRST CIRCUIT
2022 CA 1040
CROSSTEX ENERGY SERVICES, LP, CROSSTEX LIG, LLC, AND
CROSSTEX PROCESSING SERVICES, LLC
VERSUS
TEXAS BRINE COMPANY, LLC, ET AL.
Judgment Rendered:
MAR 2 3 2023
Appealed from the
23rd Judicial District Court
In and for the Parish of Assumption
State of Louisiana
Docket Number 34202
Honorable Thomas J. Kliebert, Jr., Ad Hoc Judge Presiding
Leopold Z. Sher Attorneys for Defendant/ Third-
James M. Garner Party Plaintiff/Appellant
Peter L. Hilbert, Jr. Texas Brine Company, LLC
Christopher T. Chocheles
New Orleans, LA
Travis J. Turner
Gonzales, LA
Uylsses Gene Thibodeaux
Lake Charles, LA
Roy C. Cheatwood Attorneys for Defendant/ Appellee
Kent A. Lambert Legacy Vulcan, LLC
Adam B. Zuckerman
Leopoldo J. Yanez
Matthew C. Juneau
Lauren Brink Adams
New Orleans, LA
BEFORE: GUIDRY, C. J., LANIER AND HESTER, JJ.
GUIDRY, C.J.
This dispute is one of many arising out of the August 2012 sinkhole that
appeared near Bayou Come in Assumption Parish, Louisiana. In this appeal,
Texas Brine Company, LLC (" Texas Brine") challenges a May 5, 2022 judgment
granting a partial summary judgment in favor of Legacy Vulcan, LLC (" Legacy
Vulcan") and against Texas Brine, dismissing Texas Brine' s contractual claim
against Legacy Vulcan under the Assignment of Salt Lease. For the following
reasons, we dismiss this appeal and remand the matter back to the trial court.
In a related appeal, this court recently considered an identical judgment
originating out of a different trial court number ( Docket Number 34, 265, 23rd
Judicial District Court, Assumption Parish) rendered by the same trial court, on the
same date, concerning the same parties, which was also certified as final under La.
C. C. P. art. 1915( B). See Pontchartrain Natural Gas System v. Texas Brine
Company, LLC, 22- 1001 ( La. App. 1st Cir. 311123), _ So. 3d _, 2023 WL
2291514.
The appeal in Pontchartrain was dismissed after a different panel of this
court determined that subject matter jurisdiction did not exist. Pontchartrain, 22-
1001 at p. 9, 2023 WL 2291514 at * 5. Specifically, this court concluded that the
May 5, 2022 partial summary judgment did not meet the requirements of an
appealable judgment under La. C. C. P. art. 1915( B) and R.J. Messinger, Inc. v.
Rosenblum, 04- 1664 ( La. 312105), 894 So. 2d 1113. Id. Although Texas Brine and
Legacy Vulcan entered into several interdependent contracts, the issue on appeal
was limited to Texas Brine' s claim against Legacy Vulcan for breach of the
parties' Assignment of Salt Lease. Pontchartrain, 22- 1001 at p. 8, 2023 WL
2291514 at * 4. Therefore, any decision by this court on this limited claim,
without consideration of the remaining interdependent contracts and claims
thereupon, would merely result in inefficient, piecemeal, and possibly conflicting
2
resolution of only a minor part of the parties' related contract claims." Id. Ci_
tiny
Pontchartrain Natural Gas System v. Texas Brine Company, LLC, 22- 0738, p. 6
La. App. lst Cir. 12/ 29/ 22), _ So. 3d _, 2022 WL 17983139, * 4. See also La.
C. C. art. 2053 (" A doubtful provision [ in a contract] must be interpreted in light of
the nature of the contract, equity, usages, the conduct of the parties before and after
the formation of the contract, and of other contracts of a like nature between the
same parties." ( Emphasis added.))
After a thorough review of the record, we find no material distinctions
between the judgment and issues presented in this appeal and those presented in
Pontchartrain, 22- 1001, 2023 WL 2291514. For the reasons set forth in
Pontchartrain, 22- 1001 at p. 8, 2023 WL 2291514 at * 4, we find the May 5, 2022
judgment at issue in this appeal does not meet the requirements of a final
appealable judgment under La. C. C.P. art. 1915( B) and Messinger, 04- 1664 at p.
13, 894 So. 2d at 1122. Therefore, we lack subject matter jurisdiction over this
appeal.
We dismiss the appeal and remand the matter to the trial court for further
proceedings consistent with this opinion. We issue this summary disposition in
accordance with Uniform Rules — Courts of Appeal, Rule 2- 16. 2( A)( 1), ( 2), ( 4),
and ( 6). All costs of this appeal are assessed equally between Texas Brine
Company, LLC and Legacy Vulcan, LLC.
APPEAL DISMISSED; CASE REMANDED.'
On January 24, 2023, Legacy Vulcan, LLC filed a motion to dismiss the appeal. Considering
our disposition of this matter, the motion to dismiss the appeal filed by Legacy Vulcan is denied
as moot.
On March 10, 2023, Texas Brine Company, LLC filed a motion to cancel oral argument,
dismiss appeal and remand to district court. Considering our disposition of this matter, the
motion to dismiss appeal and remand to district court filed by Texas Brine Company, LLC is
denied as moot. We further note that although this matter was initially set for oral argument on
March 14, 2023, the matter was ultimately submitted on briefs by agreement of the parties in
light of Texas Brine Company, LLC' s motion to cancel oral argument.
3