## Facts

- Rowan Companies, Inc. owned a jack-up drilling rig, the ROWAN/ODESSA, that was being towed across the Gulf of Mexico.
- During the tow, the rig struck and damaged an underwater oil pipeline owned by Marathon Pipe Line Company.
- The pipeline was a fixed installation on the seabed off the Louisiana coast.
- Marathon undertook repairs and used hydrocouples manufactured by HydroTech Systems, Inc. as part of the repair work.
- The HydroTech component allegedly contained a latent defect and failed during the repair process, causing additional damage and added repair expense beyond the original collision damage.
- Marathon sued Rowan in federal district court for the entire repair cost, including the extra costs tied to the failed HydroTech part.
- Rowan agreed to settle Marathon’s claim by paying the full repair costs, including amounts attributable to the defective hydrocouple failure.
- Rowan then filed a third-party claim against HydroTech seeking indemnity (or contribution) for the portion of the settlement attributable to HydroTech’s defective part.
- The district court dismissed Rowan’s third-party claim as untimely, reasoning that HydroTech’s liability sounded in state law rather than maritime law and that the claim was barred by time limits (including laches and/or Louisiana prescription).
- Rowan appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether Rowan’s third-party claim against HydroTech for indemnity or contribution is governed by federal maritime law or by state law.
2. Under the governing law, when does a maritime indemnity or contribution claim accrue for timeliness purposes, and was Rowan’s claim time-barred when filed.

## Decision

- The Fifth Circuit held that maritime law governed Rowan’s indemnity/contribution claim because Rowan’s primary liability to Marathon arose from a maritime tort (a vessel’s collision causing damage).
- The court held that, under maritime law, a claim for indemnity or contribution does not accrue until the party seeking recovery has its liability fixed on the main demand by judgment or the equivalent.
- Because Rowan filed its third-party claim before its liability on Marathon’s main demand was fixed, the claim was not time-barred.
- The Fifth Circuit reversed the district court’s dismissal and remanded for further proceedings.
- The court also rejected threshold, record-based defenses asserted by HydroTech (including arguments that Rowan did not pay hydrocouple-related amounts or that Marathon released HydroTech), concluding they did not support dismissal at that stage.

## Legal Principles

- A third-party claim for indemnity or contribution is generally governed by the same body of law that governs the indemnitee’s primary liability; when the underlying wrong is a maritime tort, admiralty law controls related indemnity/contribution claims.
- In maritime cases, an indemnity or contribution claim accrues when the indemnitee’s liability is fixed on the main demand by judgment or its equivalent (such as a settlement that fixes the amount and basis of liability).
- Because accrual occurs only after liability is fixed, timeliness defenses such as laches or analogous limitation periods cannot bar an indemnity/contribution claim filed before accrual.
- Dismissal at the pleadings/threshold stage is improper where the record does not conclusively establish defenses such as nonpayment of the claimed loss or a release that extinguishes the third party’s liability.

## Conclusion

The Fifth Circuit treated Rowan’s effort to recover from HydroTech as a maritime indemnity/contribution claim tied to a maritime collision, held the claim did not accrue until Rowan’s liability to Marathon was fixed, and reversed the dismissal of Rowan’s third-party action as time-barred, remanding for a decision on the merits.


Marathon Pipe Line Co. v. Drilling Rig Rowan/Odessa, 761 F.2d 229 (1985)