Campbell v. Sonat Offshore Drilling, Inc.
979 F.2d 1115 | Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit | 1992
What This Case Means for Subcontractors
A worker employed by Frank's Casing Crews was injured while transferring between offshore drilling vessels. The general contractor (UTP) tried to make Frank's indemnify them for the injury claim. Frank's argued that Louisiana law prohibited such indemnification. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that because the work happened on the high seas, federal maritime law applied instead of Louisiana law, making the indemnification clause in the contract valid and enforceable. This means subcontractors working offshore cannot rely on state anti-indemnity laws to escape broad indemnification obligations.
Key Takeaways
- •Offshore work is governed by federal maritime law, not state law—your state's anti-indemnity protections may not apply to you.
- •Indemnification clauses in maritime contracts are enforceable even if they would be illegal under state law, so review offshore contract terms carefully before signing.
- •If you work on vessels or offshore platforms, assume you will be required to indemnify the general contractor and project owner for injuries, regardless of who was at fault.
Frank's is obligated to indemnify UTP and Sonat pursuant to the terms of agreements between the parties.
Frequently Asked Question
Can I refuse to indemnify the general contractor on an offshore job if my state prohibits indemnity clauses?
No. If your work is on the high seas or involves maritime operations, federal maritime law applies instead of state law. Federal maritime law allows broad indemnification clauses, even if your state prohibits them. You must review and negotiate these terms before signing any offshore contract.
Related Cases
Gall v. United States
Appellate courts must review all sentences under an abuse-of-discretion standard regardless of whether they fall inside or outside the Guidelines range, and cannot require extraordinary circumstances to justify sentences outside the range.
Piotrowski v. City of Houston
Municipal liability under § 1983 requires proof of official policy as the moving force; isolated employee misconduct insufficient, and equal protection claim time-barred.
Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Pena
Federal race-based classifications must be analyzed under strict scrutiny regardless of whether they benefit or burden minorities, and the Fifth Amendment's equal protection obligation equals the Fourteenth Amendment's.
Northeastern Florida Chapter of the Associated General Contractors of America v. City of Jacksonville
An association of contractors has standing to challenge a minority set-aside ordinance without proving any member would have won a contract absent the ordinance; the injury is denial of equal competitive opportunity, not loss of a specific contract.
Fitzgerald v. Advanced Spine Fixation Systems, Inc.
A manufacturer must indemnify an innocent seller for products liability litigation costs under Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code § 82.002(a), even if the seller did not sell the particular defective product that injured the plaintiff, provided the seller qualifies as a 'seller' under the statute.
In Re Kellogg Brown & Root, Inc.
The Civil Commitment of Sexually Violent Predators Act is civil, not criminal, and does not violate due process even when applied to incompetent defendants.