Ioannis Maroulis Versus Entergy Louisiana, LLC

IOANNIS MAROULIS NO. 20-C-241

VERSUS FIFTH CIRCUIT

ENTERGY LOUISIANA, LLC, ET AL COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF LOUISIANA

ON APPLICATION FOR SUPERVISORY REVIEW FROM THE
TWENTY-FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
PARISH OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF LOUISIANA
NO. 793-761, DIVISION "C"
HONORABLE JUNE B. DARENSBURG, JUDGE PRESIDING

February 10, 2021

ROBERT A. CHAISSON
JUDGE

Panel composed of Judges Marc E. Johnson,
Robert A. Chaisson, and John J. Molaison, Jr.

WRIT GRANTED; SUMMARY JUDGMENT GRANTED;
THIRD-PARTY CLAIMS DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE
RAC
MEJ
JJM

COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT,
IOANNIS MAROULIS
Chet G. Boudreaux
William J. Mitchell, II
Richard F. Zimmerman, III

COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/RELATOR,
ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY
Robert I. Siegel
Elizabeth A. B. Carville

COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT,
HOTEL INVESTORS, LLC AND EXPOTEL HOSPITALITY SERVICES, LLC
H. Minor Pipes, III
Stephen L. Miles
Patrick J. Lorio
Emily E. Ross

COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT,
SUNBELT RENTALS SCAFFOLDING SERVIVCES, LLC
Douglas K. Williams
Cullen J. Dupuy
Druit G. Gremillion, Jr.
Kelsey A. Clark

COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT,
EVANSTON INSURANCE COMPANY
Sidney W. Degan, III
Karl H. Schmid
Travis L. Bourgeois
Paul A. Eckert

COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT,
ENTERGY LOUISIANA, LLC
Catharine O. Gracia
Sandra Diggs-Miller
John A. Braymer
Darryl M. Phillips

COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT,
CASTLEMAN DONLEA AND ASSOCIATES, LLC
Andre' C. Gaudin
Mindy N. Duffourc
Jason R. Tomlinson

COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT,
SCOTTSDALE INSURANCE COMPANY
Douglas M. Kleeman
Katherine K. Quirk

COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT,
AUSI BUILDERS AND CONSTRUCTION, LLC
Michael S. Futrell

CHAISSON, J.

ACE American Insurance Company (“ACE”) seeks supervisory review of a

June 30, 2020 judgment of the trial court denying its motion for summary

judgment seeking dismissal of third-party claims filed by Castleman, Donlea, and

Associates, LLC (“Castleman”) seeking coverage as an additional insured under a

commercial general liability (“CGL”) policy issued by ACE to Sunbelt Rentals

Scaffold Services, LLC (“Sunbelt”). Pursuant to the provisions of La. C.C.P. art.

966(H), this case was assigned for briefing and oral argument. For the following

reasons, we grant this writ application, reverse that portion of the trial court’s

ruling that denied ACE’s motion for summary judgment, render judgment granting

ACE’s motion for summary judgment, and dismiss Castleman’s third-party claims

against ACE with prejudice.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

This complex, multiparty case arises from a work-related accident that

occurred during the renovation of the Hampton Inn located in Metairie, Louisiana.

Hotel Investors, LLC (“Hotel Investors”), the owner of the hotel, and its

management company, Expotel Hospitality - HIM, LLC (“Expotel”), hired Sigur

Construction, LLC (“Sigur”) and Castleman as the general contractors for the

project. Castleman, in turn, hired Sunbelt as the scaffolding subcontractor for the

project. On April 19, 2018, Ioannis Maroulis, an employee of Sunbelt, suffered an

electrical shock when a piece of scaffolding equipment came into contact with an

overhead power line.

Mr. Maroulis filed a petition for damages against Hotel Investors and

Expotel, and various other defendants, alleging various counts of negligence.

Hotel Investors and Expotel then filed a third-party demand against Castleman and

its insurer, Evanston Insurance Company (“Evanston”), alleging a breach of the

20-C-241 1

construction contract between Hotel Investors and Castleman and seeking

insurance coverage under the Evanston policy. Castleman filed its own third-party

demand against Sunbelt and its insurer, ACE, seeking contractual indemnification

and insurance coverage as an additional insured under the CGL policy issued by

ACE.

Castleman alleged in its third-party complaint that Sunbelt owes contractual

indemnity to Castleman for the damages asserted by Hotel Investors and Expotel.

Castleman further alleged that Sunbelt agreed to provide insurance coverage to

Castleman to insure it against claims that arose in connection with Sunbelt’s work

on the project and to add Castleman as an additional insured on its liability policy

that was issued by ACE. According to Castleman, Sunbelt provided it with a

certificate of insurance to prove that it had sufficient coverage to insure Castleman

against claims arising in connection with Sunbelt’s work. Castleman also alleged

that Sunbelt is in breach of an oral obligation to insure Castleman.

In addition to its claims against Sunbelt, Castleman also filed claims against

ACE, seeking insurance coverage under the CGL policy issued by ACE to Sunbelt.

Both Sunbelt and ACE filed motions for summary judgment seeking dismissal of

Castleman’s claims. Following a hearing on the matter, the trial court denied the

motions for summary judgment on the basis that there existed genuine issues of

material fact regarding whether an indemnity agreement existed between

Castleman and Sunbelt. ACE filed this timely writ application seeking supervisory

review of that judgment.

DISCUSSION

Appellate courts review summary judgments de novo using the same criteria

that govern the trial court’s determination of whether summary judgment is

appropriate. O’Krepki v. O’Krepki, 16-50 (La. App. 5 Cir. 5/26/16), 193 So.3d

574, 577. A motion for summary judgment will be granted if the pleadings,

20-C-241 2

depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the

affidavits, if any, show that there is not genuine issue as to material fact, and that

the mover is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. La. C.C.P. art. 966; Semco,

LLC v. Grand Ltd., 16-342 (La. App. 5 Cir. 5/31/17), 221 So.3d 1004, 1031 (citing

Oubre v. Louisiana Citizens Fair Plan, 11-0097 (La. 12/16/11), 79 So.3d 987,

1002-03). If the mover will not bear the burden of proof at trial on the issue that is

before the court on the motion for summary judgment, the mover’s burden on the

motion does not require him to negate all essential elements of the adverse party’s

claim, action, or defense, but rather to point out to the court the absence of factual

support for one or more elements essential to the adverse party’s claim, action, or

defense. La. C.C.P. art. 966; David v. Dollar Tree Stores, Inc., 19-36 (La. App. 5

Cir. 10/2/19), 282 So.3d 329, 331. The burden is on the adverse party to produce

factual support sufficient to establish the existence of a genuine issue of material

fact or that the mover is not entitled to judgment as a matter of law. La. C.C.P. art.

966.

Upon de novo review, we find that, although Sunbelt did obtain CGL and

workers’ compensation policies to protect itself against risks during the

construction project, there is no evidence of a contractual indemnity agreement,

written or oral, between Castleman and Sunbelt. We also find that there is no

evidence that Sunbelt agreed to procure insurance on Castleman’s behalf or name

Castleman as an additional insured.

A review of the policy issued by ACE to Sunbelt shows that Castleman was

not named as an additional insured. In the absence of any indemnity agreement

between Sunbelt and Castleman, there is no legal basis for Castleman’s third-party

demand seeking insurance coverage under the ACE policy. The burden in this

instance is on Castleman to produce factual support sufficient to establish a

20-C-241 3

genuine issue of material fact or that ACE is not entitled to judgment as a matter of

law. We find that Castleman has failed to meet its burden.

CONCLUSION

Upon de novo review and in accordance with reasons articulated in the

opinion on the related writ, 20-C-246, we find that Castleman has failed to produce

factual support to establish a genuine issue of material fact or that ACE is not

entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Accordingly, we grant this writ

application, reverse that portion of the trial court’s ruling that denied ACE’s

motion for summary judgment, render judgment granting ACE’s motion for

summary judgment, and dismiss Castleman’s third-party claims against ACE with

prejudice.

WRIT GRANTED;
SUMMARY JUDGMENT GRANTED;
THIRD-PARTY CLAIMS DISMISSED
WITH PREJUDICE

20-C-241 4

SUSAN M. CHEHARDY CURTIS B. PURSELL

CHIEF JUDGE CLERK OF COURT

NANCY F. VEGA
FREDERICKA H. WICKER
CHIEF DEPUTY CLERK
JUDE G. GRAVOIS
MARC E. JOHNSON
ROBERT A. CHAISSON SUSAN BUCHHOLZ
STEPHEN J. WINDHORST
FIRST DEPUTY CLERK
HANS J. LILJEBERG
JOHN J. MOLAISON, JR. FIFTH CIRCUIT
MELISSA C. LEDET
JUDGES 101 DERBIGNY STREET (70053)
DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL STAFF
POST OFFICE BOX 489
GRETNA, LOUISIANA 70054 (504) 376-1400

(504) 376-1498 FAX
www.fifthcircuit.org

NOTICE OF JUDGMENT AND CERTIFICATE OF DELIVERY
I CERTIFY THAT A COPY OF THE OPINION IN THE BELOW-NUMBERED MATTER HAS BEEN DELIVERED
IN ACCORDANCE WITH UNIFORM RULES - COURT OF APPEAL, RULE 2-16.4 AND 2-16.5 THIS DAY
FEBRUARY 10, 2021 TO THE TRIAL JUDGE, CLERK OF COURT, COUNSEL OF RECORD AND ALL PARTIES
NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL, AS LISTED BELOW:

20-C-241
E-NOTIFIED
24TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT (CLERK)
HONORABLE JUNE B. DARENSBURG (DISTRICT JUDGE)
RICHARD F. ZIMMERMAN, III ELIZABETH A. B. CARVILLE (RELATOR) ROBERT I. SIEGEL (RELATOR)
(RESPONDENT) PATRICK J. LORIO (RESPONDENT) STEPHEN L. MILES (RESPONDENT)
H. MINOR PIPES, III (RESPONDENT) DOUGLAS K. WILLIAMS (RESPONDENT) DRUIT G. GREMILLION, JR.
CULLEN J. DUPUY (RESPONDENT) TRAVIS L. BOURGEOIS (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT)
SIDNEY W. DEGAN, III (RESPONDENT) DOUGLAS M. KLEEMAN (RESPONDENT) DARRYL M. PHILLIPS (RESPONDENT)
MINDY N. DUFFOURC (RESPONDENT) MICHAEL S. FUTRELL (RESPONDENT)

MAILED
EMILY E. ROSS (RESPONDENT) KATHERINE K. QUIRK (RESPONDENT) KARL H. SCHMID (RESPONDENT)
ATTORNEY AT LAW ATTORNEY AT LAW ATTORNEY AT LAW
1100 POYDRAS STREET 365 CANAL STREET 400 POYDRAS STREET
SUITE 1800 SUITE 2000 SUITE 2600
NEW ORLEANS, LA 70163 NEW ORLEANS, LA 70130 NEW ORLEANS, LA 70130

ANDRE' C. GAUDIN (RESPONDENT) PAUL A. ECKERT (RESPONDENT) CHET G. BOUDREAUX (RESPONDENT)
JASON R. TOMLINSON (RESPONDENT) ATTORNEY AT LAW WILLIAM J. MITCHELL, II
ATTORNEYS AT LAW 5555 HILTON AVENUE (RESPONDENT)
5213 AIRLINE DRIVE SUITE 620 ATTORNEYS AT LAW
METAIRIE, LA 70001 BATON ROUGE, LA 70808 5656 HILTON AVENUE
BATON ROUGE, LA 70808
JOHN A. BRAYMER (RESPONDENT) CATHARINE O. GRACIA (RESPONDENT)
SANDRA DIGGS-MILLER (RESPONDENT) ATTORNEY AT LAW KELSEY A. CLARK (RESPONDENT)
ATTORNEYS AT LAW 639 LOYOLA AVENUE ATTORNEY AT LAW
639 LOYOLA AVENUE SUITE 2600 ONE AMERICAN PLACE, 23RD FLOOR
26TH FLOOR NEW ORLEANS, LA 70113 POST OFFICE BOX 3197
NEW ORLEANS, LA 70113 BATON ROUGE, LA 70821-3197