Levence John Matte v. Zapata Offshore Company, Defendants/third Party v. Timco, Inc., Third Party

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that a choice of law provision in a Master Service Agreement “violates federal policy expressed in the Lands Act, which seeks to apply the substantive law of the adjacent state to problems arising on the Shelf’
• finding that a preliminary agreement that clearly expressed the parties’ intent to not be bound to any obligations until the acceptance of a later agreement was not a binding contract
• concluding choice of law provision between parties violated “the federal policy expressed in [OCSLA], which seeks to apply the substantive law of the adjacent states to problems arising on the Shelf’
• concluding choice of law provision between parties violated “the federal policy expressed in [OCSLA], which seeks to apply the substantive law of the adjacent states to problems arising on the Shelf”
• where this Court invalidated a contractual choice of law provision as \an obvious end-run of the Louisiana Legislature's effort to improve oilfield safety\
• “The public policy of Louisiana is clear, certain, and unambiguous. Any provision which attempts to provide a defense of indemnity ... is void and unenforceable.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).