Bass v. Phoenix Seadrill/78
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
749 F.2d 1154 (1985)
- Written by Daniel Clark, JD
Facts
Ronnie Bass (plaintiff) was an employee on an offshore oil rig. Branham Industries, Inc. (Branham) designed the rig’s derrick, and Crown Rig Building Services, Inc. (Crown) built it. Phoenix Seadrill/78, Ltd. (Phoenix) (defendant) was Bass’s employer. A loose handle fell from a high platform and struck Bass, who was working on the rig’s floor, and Bass suffered severe injuries. Bass and Phoenix negotiated a settlement. In exchange for $210,000, Bass agreed to (1) release Phoenix from all liability, (2) share the proceeds with Phoenix of any future recovery from Branham or Crown (the rebate provision), and (3) grant Phoenix the right to veto any settlement agreement Branham or Crown might try to enter into with Bass (the veto provision). Bass was represented by counsel and expressed that he fully understood the terms of the settlement and its effects on his legal rights. Moreover, the settlement explained the effects of its provisions repeatedly and was written in plain, intelligible language. The district court voided the rebate and veto provisions of the settlement, finding that they were unfair to Bass and improperly deterred future settlements with Branham and Crown. The district court authorized the settlement as a mere release from liability in exchange for $210,000. Phoenix and Bass appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Randall, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.