Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation v. Transportation Insurance Company
953 F.2d 985 | Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit | 1992
What This Case Means for Subcontractors
Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation sued insurance companies over coverage for work on natural gas transmission pipelines in the Gulf of Mexico. The court ruled that Louisiana's Oilfield Anti-Indemnity Act only protects workers on oil, gas, or water wells—not on pipeline transportation infrastructure. This means indemnification clauses in pipeline contracts are not automatically void under Louisiana law, even though they would be prohibited for well-related work.
Key Takeaways
- •The Louisiana Oilfield Anti-Indemnity Act does not protect subcontractors working on natural gas transmission pipelines or transportation infrastructure—only on wells.
- •Broad indemnification clauses in pipeline contracts may be enforceable in Louisiana, so review your contract terms carefully before signing.
- •If you work on well drilling, completion, or exploration, you have stronger legal protection against indemnity clauses than if you work on pipeline transportation.
The contract must pertain to a well; transportation alone is insufficient.
Frequently Asked Question
Does Louisiana's anti-indemnity law protect me if I'm working on a natural gas pipeline?
No. Louisiana's Oilfield Anti-Indemnity Act only protects workers on oil, gas, or water wells. If you're doing work on pipeline transportation or infrastructure, the law does not apply, and indemnification clauses in your contract may be enforceable. Always have an attorney review your contract before signing.
Related Cases
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.
Green International, Inc. v. Solis
No-damages-for-delay clauses in construction contracts need not meet the conspicuousness requirement established in Dresser for exculpatory negligence clauses, and such clauses are enforceable to bar delay damages absent specific exceptions.
Associated Indemnity Corp. v. CAT Contracting, Inc.
A surety does not owe a common law duty of good faith to its principal, but good faith is a contractual condition precedent to indemnification, requiring proof of improper motive or willful ignorance rather than mere negligence.
Entergy Gulf States, Inc. v. Summers
A premises owner that contracts for work performance and provides workers' compensation insurance to contractors' employees qualifies as a statutory employer entitled to the exclusive remedy defense under the Texas Workers' Compensation Act.
Lee Lewis Construction, Inc. v. Harrison
A general contractor owes a duty of care to a subcontractor's employee for fall protection when it retains actual control over safety measures, and the evidence sufficiently supported findings of negligence and gross negligence.
Rory v. Continental Insurance
Unambiguous contractual limitations periods in insurance policies must be enforced as written unless they violate law or public policy; judicial assessments of reasonableness cannot override clear contract terms.