## Facts

- Stanley Duplantis, an employee of Grace Offshore Co. (formerly Booker Drilling Co.), worked as a roustabout on a drilling rig positioned on Shell Offshore, Inc.’s fixed platform on the Outer Continental Shelf off Louisiana.
- Duplantis alleged he was injured on March 28, 1990, when he slipped on a grease-covered two-by-four while performing work on the platform.
- According to Duplantis, his Grace/Booker supervisor (a crane operator) directed him to move and stack a piece of wood in a specified area.
- Duplantis fell onto a padeye on the cover of a pedestal crane owned by Shell.
- The Duplantises alleged Shell was negligent in maintaining the platform, including allowing the grease-covered board to be present.
- Shell had personnel on the platform (including a “company man” and a safety person), but Grace/Booker ran day-to-day operations and housekeeping in the work area.
- The Duplantises sued Shell in federal district court; Shell moved for summary judgment after discovery extensions.
- The district court granted summary judgment to Shell and dismissed all claims with prejudice; the Duplantises appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether, under the governing platform-owner/independent-contractor liability standard, the summary judgment record created a genuine issue of material fact that Shell owed and breached a duty to Duplantis.
2. Whether evidence that Shell owned the platform and had general supervisory or safety personnel on site was sufficient to show retained operational control or Shell’s creation/knowledge of the specific hazard.

## Decision

- The Fifth Circuit reviewed the summary judgment ruling de novo.
- The court affirmed summary judgment for Shell and the dismissal with prejudice.
- The court held the plaintiffs failed to present specific evidence that Shell controlled the operative details of Grace/Booker’s work or created/was responsible for the grease-covered board.
- The presence of Shell personnel and general oversight rights did not establish the level of control required to impose liability for injuries to an independent contractor’s employee.

## Legal Principles

- On summary judgment, once the movant shows entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, the nonmovant must produce specific facts showing a genuine issue for trial; allegations or general assertions are insufficient.
- Under OCSLA, adjacent state law (here, Louisiana) may apply as surrogate federal law, together with controlling federal principles governing offshore platform owner duties.
- A platform owner generally is not vicariously liable for the negligence of an independent contractor or for hazards arising from the contractor’s operations.
- Liability may arise if the platform owner retains or exercises operational control over the manner and method of the contractor’s work, or if the owner creates, permits, or is responsible for an unreasonably dangerous condition.
- General rights to inspect, monitor safety, or stop work, without control of operative details, do not constitute retained operational control.

## Conclusion

The Fifth Circuit affirmed judgment for Shell because the plaintiffs’ evidence did not support a finding that Shell either exercised operational control over Grace/Booker’s work or created/was responsible for the greasy board that allegedly caused Duplantis’s fall, leaving no triable issue of Shell’s negligence.


Duplantis v. Shell Offshore, Inc., 948 F.2d 187 (5th Cir. 1991)