Boudreaux v. Axiall Corp et al

Filing 321

MEMORANDUM ORDER denying as moot 231 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge Donald E Walter on 5/9/2022. (crt,Bray, K)

Download PDF
Case 2:18-cv-00956-DEW-KK Document 321 Filed 05/09/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 15852 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA LAKE CHARLES DIVISION ______________________________________________________________________________ ROBERT LEE BOUDREAUX CIVIL ACTION NO. 18-0956 VERSUS JUDGE DONALD E. WALTER AXIALL CORP., ET AL. MAGISTRATE JUDGE KAY ______________________________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM ORDER Before the Court is a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Servitude Issues filed by the Plaintiff, Robert Lee Boudreaux. See Record Document 231. Defendants, Eagle US 2 LLC (“Eagle”), Axiall Corporation, and Axiall, LLC, oppose the motion. See Record Document 257. Plaintiff requests that the Court make the following legal determinations: (1) the 10-inch brine pipeline was installed and operated pursuant to a 1946 agreement recorded in the conveyance records of Calcasieu Parish (“1946 Servitude Agreement”); (2) the 16-inch brine pipeline was installed and operated pursuant to a 1965 right of way agreement recorded in the conveyance records of Calcasieu Parish (“1965 Servitude Agreement”); (3) the 1946 Servitude Agreement and 1965 Servitude Agreement, together with Louisiana suppletive law (where applicable), govern the obligations owed by Eagle, as the dominant estate holder, to the Plaintiff, as the servient estate holder; (4) the 1965 Servitude Agreement terminated by its own terms after the filing of this lawsuit; and (5) as a result of this termination, Eagle is obligated under the plain terms of the 1965 Servitude Agreement to promptly remove its 16-inch brine pipeline and any other associated equipment from the Plaintiff’s land. See Record Document 231-1 at 5-6. The Court previously determined that Plaintiff compromised his claim for breach of contract. See Record Documents 285 and 286. This would include a claim for breach of either Case 2:18-cv-00956-DEW-KK Document 321 Filed 05/09/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 15853 the 1946 Servitude Agreement or 1965 Servitude Agreement. It is apparent to the Court that the Plaintiff has requested the legal determinations above to support his breach of contract claim. However, with the dismissal of that claim, Plaintiff’s damages are limited to the remedies provided for property damage claims under Louisiana law. Based on the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff’s motion (Record Document 231) is hereby DENIED AS MOOT. THUS DONE AND SIGNED, this 9th day of May, 2022. 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?