Find Answers To Your Questions By Searching Here:

Case Results

DISCLAIMER: Please note that every case is different and these verdicts and settlements, while accurate, do not represent what we may obtain for you in your case.

Confidential: Drilling Contractor Settles Single Death Premises Liability Case Arising Out Of Shooting In Middle East

Houston, Texas -- Operator hired Drilling Contractor to conduct drilling operations at a rig site in the country of Yemen, located in the Middle East. The company man at the rig site was the Decedent, who was employed by the Operator. Employees of various other service companies were present at the rig site. Approximately forty Yemen military personnel were present around the rig site. On March 18, 2003, an employee of Drilling Contractor went on a shooting rampage in which he intentionally shot and wounded the rig mechanic, shot and killed the rig manager, shot and killed the company man (Decedent), shot and killed another employee of Drilling Contractor, and shot and killed himself. The shooter used a 9 mm Russian Makarov pistol. Plaintiffs asserted premises liability and negligent supervision claims. Plaintiffs alleged Drilling Contractor retained control over security at the work site based on some provisions in the Drilling Contract between it and Operator. Plaintiffs alleged Drilling Contractor was aware of an unreasonable risk of harm based on the history of terrorism in Yemen, including the October 2000 bombing of the USS Cole and the escalation of violence in the region in connection with the US war against Iraq. Drilling Contractor’s corporate representative admitted at deposition that the company was aware of an unreasonable risk of harm, and that the company intentionally breached a provision in the Drilling Contract requiring it to provide security. Plaintiffs alleged Drilling Contractor failed to provide adequate security at the rig site in providing no security guards employed by the company. Plaintiffs further alleged Drilling Contractor was negligent in its supervision of the shooter. Plaintiffs developed evidence that the shooter, as well as most of the employees of Drilling Contractor, used the narcotic substance “qat” at the drill site on a daily basis. Drilling Contractor’s retained toxicologist expert admitted during his deposition that “qat” is an intoxicating and mind-altering substance. Drilling Contractor’s Quality Manager admitted during deposition that he knew “qat” was illegal in the United States. “Qat” is an illegal Schedule I substance under the U. S. Controlled Subtances Act, the same categorization as heroin and LSD. Further, Plaintiffs developed evidence that the shooter was connected to Al Qaeda, possessed a gun at the work site for several months, was having problems with depression, was taking valium prescribed by the rig medic, had a history of mental illness, and made various statements that he was a victim of injustice at the hands of the oil companies. Drilling Contractor alleged it did not retain control over security at the rig site. It asserted that Operator (including Decedent) and the Yemen military jointly retained control over security, based on written agreements between those entities. Drilling Contractor alleged it was not aware of any unreasonable risk of harm from its employees at the rig site, and that its employee (the shooter) did not present any risk of harm. The Court granted Drilling Contractor’s motion to designate the shooter and the Yemen military as responsible third parties. Decedent, age 64, was shot in the back. The bullet punctured his heart and exited his chest, causing his almost immediate death. Plaintiffs claimed in excess of $1,000,000 in past lost wages and loss of future wage earning capacity. Decedent was earning over $100,000 per year as a Company Man in Yemen. The case settled on the 14th trial day, the morning after the Drilling Contractor’s Field Superintendent completed his trial testimony. This was three days after the Virginia Tech massacre, and the day before Plaintiffs intended to rest their case. While on the stand, the Field Superintendent admitted the company violated various work policies which applied to the work site in question. In post-settlement interviews with jurors, two of the male jurors noted that they observed this witness in the bathroom throwing up on three different occasions. The Drilling Contractor’s corporate representative testified by deposition for the first time in Houston, at Plaintiffs’ request. Shortly before trial, over a year and a half after his first deposition, defense counsel arranged for the same corporate representative to give a trial deposition in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. On cross examination in Dubai, the corporate representative admitted that he made a “mistake” and was changing his prior Houston testimony on more than fifteen topics. Plaintiffs called this corporate representative by video tape as their first witness in the case. Drilling Contractor filed a motion to apply Yemen law. The application of Yemen law would have effectively barred Plaintiffs from recovering any damages. The parties filed over ten briefs on this issue, over a period of several months. At the conclusion of all briefing and hearings, the motion was denied. Drilling contractor initially filed a special appearance, denying it was subject to jurisdiction in Texas. After Plaintiffs engaged Drilling Contractor in voluminous written and deposition discovery on the special appearance issue, Drilling Contractor agreed to withdraw its special appearance. Over thirty-five depositions were taken in the case, including four depositions in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. Other deposition sites included Boston, Denver, Oklahoma City, Dallas and San Antonio. Plaintiffs' Experts: John L. Currie, A.C.F.E., International Security & Terrorism, Oklahoma City John Klaude Krusz, Ph.D., M.D., Pharmacology, Dallas Vincent J. M. DiMaio, M.D., Forensic Pathology, San Antonio Kenneth G. McCoin, Ph.D., C.F.A., Economics, Houston Defendants' Experts: Col. David W. Hunt (Ret.), Terrorism (FOX news consultant), Scarborough, Maine Michael Louis Shanklin, International Security & Terrorism (former CIA operative), Roma, Italy Ambassador Barbara Bodine (Ret.), Yemen Demographics (former U.S. Ambassador to Yemen), Cambridge, Massachusetts Michael Pritchard, Oil Industry Security, Hunt Oil Company, Dallas, Texas Jacques Veerman, MD, Medicine, Belgium Robert Palmer, Ph.D., Toxicology, Denver, Colorado Defense Counsel: Defendants were represented by Fulbright & Jaworski attorneys Rachel Clingman, Steve Roberts, Jason Rother, Nick Morrow, Carter Dugan and Harry Scarborough.