## Facts

- Louis Adams, an employee of contractor P2S, worked on a Chevron-owned offshore platform on the Outer Continental Shelf.
- To access an overhead area, Adams climbed onto a battery stand mounted on the platform and, while climbing down, twisted his knee and was injured.
- Adams and his wife sued Chevron for negligent maintenance and unsafe conditions; Chevron attributed fault to Adams and P2S, including alleged safety-rule violations.
- After the incident, Chevron altered the area by converting the battery stand into a step to improve access.
- Adams sought to admit Chevron’s work orders documenting the post-accident modification; Chevron objected under Federal Rule of Evidence 407.
- A jury found Chevron negligent but apportioned comparative fault as Chevron 10%, Adams 60%, and P2S 30%, and awarded damages.
- The case proceeded under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA), applying Louisiana tort law as surrogate federal law.

## Issues

1. Whether the district court abused its discretion by excluding Chevron’s post-accident work orders as subsequent remedial measures barred by Federal Rule of Evidence 407.
2. Whether the evidence was insufficient to support the jury’s comparative-fault allocation and resulting damages award.

## Decision

- The Fifth Circuit affirmed the judgment.
- The court held the work orders were properly excluded under Rule 407 as evidence of subsequent remedial measures offered to prove negligence.
- The court held the jury’s allocation of fault and damages award were supported by the evidence and were not against the great weight of the evidence.

## Legal Principles

- Federal Rule of Evidence 407 bars evidence of post-injury remedial measures when offered to prove negligence or culpable conduct.
- Rule 407 permits such evidence only for limited purposes (e.g., ownership, control, feasibility, impeachment) when those matters are genuinely controverted.
- Where a defendant does not dispute ownership or control, Rule 407’s ownership/control exceptions do not apply.
- Appellate review of a jury’s comparative-fault allocation under Louisiana law (as applied through OCSLA) is highly deferential; the allocation will be upheld if supported by the record.

## Conclusion

The Fifth Circuit upheld the exclusion of Chevron’s post-accident work orders as inadmissible subsequent remedial measures and declined to disturb the jury’s comparative-fault apportionment because the record supported assigning most fault to Adams and his employer rather than Chevron.


Adams v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc., 383 F. App’x 447 (5th Cir. 2010)