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

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