HOUSTON – A panel of judges has affirmed a 215th District Court’s decision regarding "death penalty" sanctions rendered against a drilling company.
1st District Court of Appeal Justices Terry Jennings, Jane Bland and Harvey Brown have affirmed that appellant, East African Drilling LTD, in fact committed death penalty sanctions in regards to breach of contract with allegations brought on by appellee OEJP LLC, assignee for numerous plaintiffs and intervenors, in a March 27 order.
In 2015, OEJP filed suit against East African Drilling over alleged failure to pay for equipment, maintenance work and products needed for work on a drilling rig, arguing mechanic’s lien, breach of contract, fraud and negligent misrepresentation among other charges.
Denying all charges, East African Drilling attempted to quell the suit by refusing to dispose Leo Budd, owner and director, for oral testimony in 2015 and 2016, and within two years, OEJP filed three death penalty sanctions against the drilling company and was collectively awarded almost $3.5 million in damages and attorney fees.
Beginning the Standard of Review citing Braden v. Downey 1991, authoring judge Jennings defines a “death penalty” sanction, as “any sanction that adjudicates a claim and precludes the presentation of the merits of the case,” before addressing East African Drilling’s argument that the trial court erred in its death penalty sanctions ruling.
“A trial court does not abuse its discretion merely because it decides a discretionary matter differently than an appellate court would in a similar circumstance,” Jennings wrote, adding Gray v. CHCA Bayshore L.P. as precedent.
“If some evidence supports a trial court’s decision to impose sanctions, we will not hold that it abused its discretion,” he added.
According to East African Drilling, it withdrew its disapproval to the sanctions motion and made known Budd would not give oral testimony.
“In sum, East African Drilling withdrew its '[r]esponse in [o]pposition' to plaintiffs and intervenors’ second motion for sanctions, and, thus, it did not complain in the trial court about the death penalty sanctions imposed against it,” Jennings wrote.” Accordingly, we hold that East African Drilling has not preserved for appellate review its complaints about the trial court’s imposition of sanctions.”