2016-06797 / Court: 234

2/2/2016 2:54:07 PM Chris Daniel - District Clerk Harris County Envelope No. 8916507 By: Nelson Cuero Filed: 2/2/2016 2:54:07 PM

CAUSE NO: § § § § § § §

VS. HORNBECK OFFSHORE SERVICES LLC, and HORNBECK OFFSHORE OPERATORS, LLC

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS JUDICIAL DISTRICT

ist ric tC ler k

RICHARD SEVIGNY

PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL PETITION AND REQUESTS FOR DISCLOSURES TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:

lD

COMES NOW, RICHARD SEVIGNY, hereinafter referred to as ‘Plaintiff’, complaining of

nie

HORNBECK OFFSHORE SERVICES, LLC and HORNBECK OFFSHORE OPERATORS, LLC,

is

Da

hereinafter referred to as ‘Defendants’, and would respectfully show as follows:

OF

CIVIL PROCEDURE 190.4, Plaintiff requests that discovery be

e

of

Pursuant to TEXAS RULE

C

hr

I. DISCOVERY CLASS

II. JURISDICTION

op y

O

ffic

conducted under level 3.

C

This is an action within the maritime jurisdiction of this Court. This claim is maintained

Un of

fic

ial

under the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C. § 30104, and the General Maritime Law of the United States. III. PARTIES

Plaintiff, RICHARD SEVIGNY, is a resident of Washington County, Florida. Defendant, HORNBECK OFFSHORE SERVICES, LLC, is a Delaware corporation doing business in the State of Texas. This Defendant may be served with due process by serving its registered agent for service in Texas, Corporation Service Company d/b/a CSC-Lawyers Incorporating Service Company, 211 E. 7th Street, Suite 620, Austin, Texas 78701-3218. 1

Defendant, HORNBECK OFFSHORE OPERATORS, LLC, is a Delaware corporation doing business in the State of Texas. This Defendant may be served with due process by serving its registered agent for service in Texas, Corporation Service Company d/b/a CSC-Lawyers

ist ric tC ler k

Incorporating Service Company, 211 E. 7th Street, Suite 620, Austin, Texas 78701-3218. IV. VENUE

Venue is proper in Harris County, Texas because both Defendants do substantial business in

lD

Harris County and Defendant, HORNBECK OFFSHORE OPERATORS, LLC’s, principal

nie

business office within the State of Texas is located in Harris County, Texas. Because the Plaintiff

Da

has established proper venue against Defendant, HORNBECK OFFSHORE OPERATORS, LLC,

is

this Court also has venue of any remaining Defendants in all claims arising out of the same

C

hr

occurrence.

e

of

V. FACTS

O

ffic

Plaintiff, RICHARD SEVIGNY, would show that this lawsuit has become necessary as a

op y

result of personal injuries received on or about February 11, 2015.

C

On or about February 11, 2015, Plaintiff, RICHARD SEVIGNY, sustained injuries during

ial

the course and scope of his employment as an able body seaman for Defendants. At all material

Un of

fic

times hereto, Plaintiff was a Jones Act seaman employed by Defendant, HORNBECK OFFSHORE SERVICES, LLC, and/or Defendant, HORNBECK OFFSHORE OPERATORS, LLC. At all material times, Plaintiff was employed in service of the HOS RENAISSANCE, an offshore supply vessel, and Plaintiff was a member of said vessel’s crew.

At all material times, the HOS

RENAISSANCE was owned, operated, and/or controlled by Defendant, HORNBECK OFFSHORE SERVICES, LLC, and/or Defendant, HORNBECK OFFSHORE OPERATORS, LLC, and said

2

vessel was in navigable waters in the Gulf of Mexico. On or about February 11, 2015, employees and/or agents of Defendants negligently caused Plaintiff to sustain injuries when materials where transferred onto the HOS RENAISSANCE from the TITANIUM EXPLORER, a nearby drilling

ist ric tC ler k

ship. At the time of the occurrence, Plaintiff, RICHARD SEVIGNY, was stationed at the back deck of the HOS RENAISSANCE while waste drilling fluids were back loaded from the TITANIUM EXPLORER. During the back loading operation, Plaintiff was exposed to high levels

lD

of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) emanating from the waste drilling fluids. As a result of the occurrence,

nie

Plaintiff sustained serious and debilitating injuries to his lungs, heart, liver, and ears, among other

is

Da

parts of his body.

C

hr

VI. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION FOR NEGLIGENCE

e

of

On or about February 11, 2015, Defendants, HORNBECK OFFSHORE SERVICES, LLC

ffic

and HORNBECK OFFSHORE OPERATORS, LLC, were negligent, and said negligence was a

O

proximate cause of Plaintiff’s injuries. At all relevant times, it was feasible for Defendants to

op y

provide to Plaintiff, and Defendants owed to Plaintiff, duties of care to provide, inter alia, a safe

ial

C

place to work. Plaintiff further contends that on the occasion in question, Defendants, acting

fic

through their officers, agents, servants and/or employees, were careless and negligent in the

1. 2.

Un of

following respects:

In failing to provide a safe work environment; In failing to request and obtain proper cargo documentation from the TITANIUM EXPLORER before accepting the transfer, including, but not limited to, MSDS or chemical analysis reports, a complete cargo manifest identifying products contained in the waste drilling fluids, and a UIC 28; 3

3.

In failing to inspect the waste drilling fluids;

4.

In failing to provide safe and adequate personal protection equipment to protect Plaintiff from exposure to hydrogen sulfide (H2S) and other toxic chemicals; In failing to warn Plaintiff of the hazards presented by the waste drilling fluids;

6.

In failing to adequately monitor gas readings on the deck during the back loading

ist ric tC ler k

5.

operation to detect and respond to the presence of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) or other toxic chemicals;

In failing to properly train Plaintiff and the vessel’s crew on safe and proper

lD

7.

Da

In failing to provide prompt and adequate medical attention to Plaintiff following

is

8.

nie

handling of hazardous materials, including hydrogen sulfide (H2S);

C

Other acts of negligence as proven at time of trial.

of

9.

hr

his exposure to hydrogen sulfide (H2S); and,

e

On said date, and as a direct and proximate result of the negligent acts of Defendants,

O

ffic

Plaintiff developed severe and debilitating medical conditions, including, but not limited to,

op y

restrictive ventilatory impairment, bronchiolitis obliterans organizing pneumonia, reactive airway

C

dysfunction, aortic insufficiency in bicuspid aortic valve, arterial hypertension, insomnia,

ial

headaches, nausea, fatigue, pain in his joints, and tinnitus. Said occurrence and said injuries or

Un of

fic

medical conditions occurred as a proximate result, in whole or in part, of the initial acts and/or negligence or lack of attention, on the part of some or all named Defendants, their agents, servants and/or employees, acting in the course and scope of their employment and agency. VII. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION FOR UNSEAWORTHINESS At all times material hereto, Defendant, HORNBECK OFFSHORE SERVICES, LLC and

4

HORNBECK OFFSHORE OPERATORS, LLC, owned, operated, and/or controlled the HOS RENAISSANCE. At all relevant times it was feasible for Defendants to provide to Plaintiff, and said Defendants owed to Plaintiff, duties to provide, a vessel seaworthy in all respects, including

ist ric tC ler k

but not limited to its hull, engines, apparel, appurtenances, equipment, furnishings, fixtures and complement. Defendants, HORNBECK OFFSHORE SERVICES, LLC and HORNBECK OFFSHORE OPERATORS, LLC, breached said duty of care by failing to provide any and/or all of these particulars or others as may be disclosed upon discovery hereafter. On or about February 11,

lD

2015, Defendants, HORNBECK OFFSHORE SERVICES, LLC and HORNBECK OFFSHORE

Da

is

vessel was unseaworthy in the following particulars:

nie

OPERATORS, LLC, were careless and negligent in breaching the above duties of care, and the

The vessel had an incompetent master and/or crew;

2.

The vessel had inadequate equipment to identify and monitor the presence of

e

hydrogen sulfide (H2S);

of

C

hr

1.

The vessel stored waste drilling fluids containing toxic chemicals;

4.

The vessel lacked safe and adequate equipment to protect crewmembers from toxic

op y

O

ffic

3.

Other unseaworthy conditions as proven at time of trial.

ial

5.

C

chemical exposure; and,

Un of

fic

Said breaches of duty proximately contributed, in whole or in part, to cause Plaintiff to suffer the hereinafter complained of injuries for which Defendants, HORNBECK OFFSHORE SERVICES, LLC and HORNBECK OFFSHORE OPERATORS, LLC, are liable to Plaintiff in damages. VIII. THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION FOR MAINTENANCE AND CURE On or about February 11, 2015, and on other dates thereafter, and ever since, Defendants, 5

HORNBECK OFFSHORE SERVICES, LLC and HORNBECK OFFSHORE OPERATORS, LLC, have wrongfully failed and/or refused to provide maintenance and cure to Plaintiff in breach of duties said Defendants owe to Plaintiff. Plaintiff further alleges that it was, and still is, the duty

ist ric tC ler k

of said Defendants, as his employer, to furnish him with maintenance and cure and loss of wages. Plaintiff further alleges that Defendants, HORNBECK OFFSHORE SERVICES, LLC and HORNBECK OFFSHORE OPERATORS, LLC, have unreasonably, arbitrarily, willfully and capriciously refused to pay maintenance to him and such sums were due and owing. Plaintiff

As a result of said Defendants’

nie

capriciously refused to provide him with medical cure.

lD

further alleges that said Defendants have further unreasonably, arbitrarily, willfully and

is

Da

unreasonable failure to provide maintenance and cure, Plaintiff is entitled to recovery for

hr

damages and expenses incurred, including, but not limited to, damages for prolongation or

of

C

aggravation of injuries; pain and suffering and additional expenses.

e

Plaintiff states that in addition to such maintenance and cure benefits as he is entitled, he

O

ffic

has found it necessary to engage attorneys to represent him in the maintenance and cure action

op y

that he is entitled to and brings a suit for the reasonable attorney's fees incurred in the collection

C

of the maintenance and cure benefits due to him. Therefore, for the aforementioned reasons,

ial

Plaintiff states that he is entitled to maintenance and cure benefits, compensatory damages and

Un of

fic

attorney's fees, in a sum in excess of the minimum jurisdictional limits of this Court or for other and further sums as the Court and/or Jury may find reasonable at the time of trial of this cause. By reason of the foregoing premises and as a legal result thereof, Plaintiff has in the past and/or will in the future be caused to suffer the following described injuries and/or losses, for which Defendants, HORNBECK OFFSHORE SERVICES, LLC and HORNBECK OFFSHORE OPERATORS, LLC, are liable to Plaintiff:

6

1.

Maintenance and Cure benefits accrued to date of trial and for a reasonable time in the future, as may be found necessary; Physical and emotional injury, pain and suffering;

3.

Prolongation and or aggravation of injuries;

4.

Indebtedness for health care expenses;

5.

Indebtedness for daily living expenses;

6.

Prejudgment interest; and,

7.

Attorneys’ fees.

lD

ist ric tC ler k

2.

nie

All said injuries and damages in an extent, not now precisely known in excess of

is

Da

$5,000,000.00.

C

hr

IX. DAMAGES

e

of

As a direct and proximate result of the occurrence alleged, Plaintiff sustained severe and

ffic

painful injuries to his body and mind, and shock and injury to his nervous system and person, all of

O

which injuries have caused and continue to cause great physical and emotional pain and suffering.

op y

In connection therewith, Plaintiff would show that he has sustained severe pain, physical

ial

C

impairment, discomfort, mental anguish, and distress to date. Plaintiff is informed and believes and

fic

alleges that, in all reasonable probability, some or all of said injuries will result in permanent

Un of

damage, disability, and pain and suffering, causing general damages in an amount to be determined at trial. Moreover, Plaintiff has suffered a loss of earnings in the past, as well as a loss of future earning capacity. Furthermore, he has incurred and will incur pharmaceutical and medical expenses in connection with said injuries. By reason of the foregoing, Plaintiff would show that he has been damaged in a sum, to be determined at trial, far in excess of the minimum jurisdictional limits of this Honorable Court, for which amount he comes now and sues. 7

By reason of the foregoing premises and as a legal result thereof, Plaintiff has in the past and/or will in the future be caused to suffer the following described injuries and/or losses, for which Defendants, HORNBECK OFFSHORE SERVICES, LLC and HORNBECK OFFSHORE

ist ric tC ler k

OPERATORS, LLC, are all jointly and severally liable to Plaintiff: 1. Reasonable and necessary medical expenses in the past and in the future; 2. Physical pain and suffering in the past and in the future;

4. Loss of earning capacity in the past and in the future;

lD

3. Mental anguish in the past and in the future;

is

Da

6. Physical impairment in the past and in the future.

nie

5. Physical disfigurement in the past and in the future; and,

hr

All said injuries and damages in an extent, not now precisely known, in excess of

of

C

$10,000,000.00.

ffic

e

X. USE OF ITEMS PRODUCED IN DISCOVERY

O

Plaintiff hereby gives notice of his intent to utilize items produced in discovery in the trial

XI. JURY DEMAND

Un of

fic

ial

C

CIVIL PROCEDURE 193.7

op y

of this matter, and the authenticity of such items shall be deemed self-proven per TEXAS RULES OF

Plaintiff demands a trial by jury and tenders the appropriate fee. XII. REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURES PURSUANT TO RULE 194 OF THE TEXAS RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE

Defendants, HORNBECK OFFSHORE SERVICES, LLC and HORNBECK OFFSHORE OPERATORS, LLC, are required to disclose to Plaintiff within fifty (50) days of service of this

8

request the information or material described in Rule 194.2 of the TEXAS RULES

OF

CIVIL

PROCEDURE. Said information or materials shall be produced to Matthew D. Shaffer, Attorney for the Plaintiff, at SCHECHTER, MCELWEE, SHAFFER & HARRIS, LLP, 3200 Travis, Third Floor,

ist ric tC ler k

Houston, Texas 77006, during normal business hours. XIII. PRAYER

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff, RICHARD SEVIGNY, prays that

lD

Defendants, HORNBECK OFFSHORE SERVICES, LLC and HORNBECK OFFSHORE

nie

OPERATORS, LLC, be cited to appear and answer herein in a form and manner prescribed by law,

Da

and after jury trial of the merits of this cause, Plaintiff have judgment against Defendants, jointly

is

and severally, in a total sum in excess of the minimum jurisdictional limits of this Court, plus pre-

C

hr

judgment and post-judgment interest at the maximum legal rates, all costs of Court, and all such

e

of

other and further relief, be it general or special, at law or in equity, to which Plaintiff may show

ffic

himself justly entitled.

SCHECHTER, MCELWEE, SHAFFER, & HARRIS, L.L.P.

Un of

fic

ial

C

op y

O

Respectfully submitted,

/s/Matthew D. Shaffer MATTHEW D. SHAFFER TBA # 18085600 3200 Travis, Third Floor Houston, Texas 77006 TEL: (713) 524-3500 FAX: (713) 751-0412 [email protected] ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF PLAINTIFF DEMANDS A TRIAL BY JURY

9

Sevigny v Hornbeck Offshore Services - civil complaint.PDF ...

Feb 2, 2016 - Defendant, HORNBECK OFFSHORE SERVICES, LLC, is a Delaware corporation doing. business in the State of Texas. This Defendant may be ...

75KB Sizes 0 Downloads 178 Views

Recommend Documents

Sevigny v Hornbeck Offshore Services - civil complaint.PDF
UnofficialCopyOfficeofChrisDanielDistrictClerk. Page 3 of 9. Sevigny v Hornbeck Offshore Services - civil complaint.PDF. Sevigny v Hornbeck Offshore Services ...

Hornbeck Offshore Services v Harkand Gulf Contracting - civil ...
Hornbeck Offshore Services v Harkand Gulf Contracting - civil complaint.pdf. Hornbeck Offshore Services v Harkand Gulf Contracting - civil complaint.pdf. Open.

PACC Offshore Services
PACC Offshore Services. IPO Watch. 21 April 2014. Largest Asia-based offshore support vessels operator. Summary: PACC Offshore Services (POSH) is the largest Asia-based ... (US$m, Year ending Dec). FY11. FY12. FY13. Revenue. 241.0. 243.0. 237.3 ... T

Norden v Intership Services - civil complaint.pdf
Sep 3, 2016 - Case 4:16-cv-00627 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 03/09/16 Page 3 of 8. Page 3 of 8. Main menu. Displaying Norden v Intership Services - civil ...

CIVIL-V-HYDROLOGY AND IRRIGATION ENGINEERING [10CV55 ...
There was a problem previewing this document. Retrying... Download. Connect more apps... Try one of the apps below to open or edit this item.

Google v. Hood Services
Dec 18, 2014 - regulation of Google based upon the third-party content available on its services or the manner in which Goo gle moderates that content.2 “Congress provided broad immunity under the CDA to. Web-based service providers for all claims

Notification-JPSC-Combined-Civil-Services-Prelims-Exam.pdf ...
... answer all the questions. (A) History of India: 15 Questions. Page 3 of 32. Notification-JPSC-Combined-Civil-Services-Prelims-Exam.pdf. Notification-JPSC-Combined-Civil-Services-Prelims-Exam.pdf. Open. Extract. Open with. Sign In. Main menu. Disp

Indian Polity for Civil Services Examinations-Laxmikanth.pdf ...
There was a problem previewing this document. Retrying... Download. Connect more apps... Try one of the apps below to open or edit this item. Indian Polity for Civil Services Examinations-Laxmikanth.pdf. Indian Polity for Civil Services Examinations-

003_27032015_Central Civil Services (Joining Time) (Amendment ...
the Central Civil Services (Joining Time) Rules, 1979, namely:— ... Printed by the Manager, Government of India Press, Ring Road, Mayapuri, New Delhi- ... 003_27032015_Central Civil Services (Joining Time) (Amendment) Rules, 2015..pdf.

Download-UPSC-Civil-Services-Examination-Syllabus_www ...
Download-UPSC-Civil-Services-Examination-Syllabus_www.upscportal.com.pdf. Download-UPSC-Civil-Services-Examination-Syllabus_www.upscportal.com.

UPSC Civil Services Main (Optional) Political Science ...
UPSC Civil Services Main (Optional) Political Science & International Relations 2015 Question Paper I.pdf. UPSC Civil Services Main (Optional) Political ...

Manipur Civil Services Combined Competitive Exam (Management ...
There was a problem previewing this document. Retrying... Download. Connect more apps... Try one of the apps below to open or edit this item. Main menu.

OPSC-Odisha-Civil-Services-Examination-Notification.pdf ...
Whoops! There was a problem loading more pages. Whoops! There was a problem previewing this document. Retrying... Download. Connect more apps.

Avocet Shipping v Navig8 Bulk Pool - Civil Complaint.pdf ...
CRANE SHIPPING LLC,. EGRET SHIPPING LLC, ... At all material times to this action, Plaintiffs are foreign companies duly. organized and ... A Pooling Agreement establishes an arrangement wherein a group of similar. vessels are grouped ...

Avocet Shipping v Navig8 Bulk Pool - Civil Complaint.pdf ...
CRANE SHIPPING LLC, ... At all material times to this action, Plaintiffs are foreign companies duly ... Vessels participated in a pool of Supramax bulk carriers, managed by the ... Avocet Shipping v Navig8 Bulk Pool - Civil Complaint.pdf.

ING Bank v Theofano - civil complaint.pdf
ING BANK N.V., ... Investments Cyprus, Ltd. (“GMI”), the charterer / operator of the THEOFANO at the time ... Displaying ING Bank v Theofano - civil complaint.pdf.

Offshore & Marine
Feb 12, 2014 - look out for new lucrative liftboat contracts or further corporate developments in its marine supply base business (Ocean Sky). From a big picture perspective, the long-term investment case for Ezion remains intact. Ezion Holdings –

Offshore & Marine
Standstill agreement, but we read it as cancellation. SMM and Seadrill subsidiary North Atlantic Drilling (NAD) have agreed on a standstill period until June 2016 for the delivery of a semi-sub drilling rig, West Rigel (contracted at US$568m). The ri

AUGUST 2011, XVII Year, Issue No. 08 3 Civil ... - Civil Services Times
ers was only to be in self-defence. The mission though originally welcomed was thereafter disregarded, mainly by the general cum warlord Mohammed. Farrah Aidid who proclaimed himself to be the President in waiting. As vio- lence continued, the US org

AUGUST 2011, XVII Year, Issue No. 08 3 Civil ... - Civil Services Times
cerns had always been on the list of core issues. 9. Since 1945, the UN has ...... Essays are usually non-fictional but often subjective; while ...... colored fruits and vegetables and dark green, leafy vegetables. Some of the best sources of beta- c

AP Civil Services (Dis Proc Tribubal) act.pdf
Page 1 of 51. 1. ANDHRA PRADESH CIVIL SERVICES. (DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS TRIBUNAL) ACT. ANNEXURE- II. GOVERNMEMT OF ANDHRA ...

Central Civil Services (Conduct( Rules, 1964.PDF
The Secretary, Union Public Service Commission, New Delhi, ... and belief, in respect of information due to be furnished by me under the provisions of.