Summary
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana addresses Plaintiffs’ Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss counterclaims arising from an alleged insurance settlement agreement. The court denies dismissal of the breach-of-contract and breach-of-confidentiality counterclaims, dismisses the unjust-enrichment and double-recovery counterclaim, and declines to analyze waiver and estoppel because they are affirmative defenses rather than causes of action. The order grants the motion in part and denies it in part.
Holdings
- The breach-of-contract counterclaim was sufficiently pleaded and would not be dismissed because Ocean Harbor alleged the existence of a binding compromise and alleged conduct that, in conjunction with the agreement's terms, constituted a breach.
- The unjust-enrichment counterclaim was properly dismissed because Ocean Harbor had alleged a breach-of-contract remedy and failed to allege that no other remedy at law was available.
- Waiver and estoppel were affirmative defenses rather than causes of action, and the court would not determine their sufficiency at the motion-to-dismiss stage.
- The breach-of-confidentiality counterclaim would not be dismissed, although it appeared duplicative of the breach-of-contract counterclaim, because the alleged disclosure of confidential settlement terms was also sufficient to support the contract claim.
Questions Presented
- Whether Ocean Harbor sufficiently pleaded a breach-of-contract counterclaim based on an alleged settlement agreement.
- Whether Ocean Harbor could maintain an unjust-enrichment and double-recovery counterclaim when the alleged settlement agreement supplied another potential remedy.
- Whether waiver and estoppel were properly pleaded as causes of action or were affirmative defenses not subject to resolution under Rule 12(b)(6).
- Whether Ocean Harbor's breach-of-confidentiality counterclaim was sufficiently pleaded despite appearing duplicative of its breach-of-contract counterclaim.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (24)
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555, 570 (2007)(followed)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678-79 (2009)(followed)
- Cuvillier v. Taylor, 503 F.3d 397, 401 (5th Cir. 2007)(followed)
- S. Christian Leadership Conf. v. Sup. Ct. of the State of La., 252 F.3d 781, 786 (5th Cir. 2001)(followed)
- Fernandez-Montes v. Allied Pilots Ass’n, 987 F.2d 278, 284 (5th Cir. 1993)(followed)
- Spivey v. Robertson, 197 F.3d 772, 774 (5th Cir. 1999)(followed)
- Cutrer v. McMillan, 308 F. App’x 819, 820 (5th Cir. 2009) (per curiam)(followed)
- Lormand v. U.S. Unwired, Inc., 565 F.3d 228, 232 (5th Cir. 2009)(followed)
- Test Masters Educ. Servs., Inc. v. Singh, 428 F.3d 559, 570 (5th Cir. 2005)(followed)
- Smith v. GE Healthcare, Inc., No. 3:19-CV-00492, 2019 WL 4565246, at *7 (W.D. La. Sept. 4, 2019)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 24.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.