HOUSTON – The 1st District Court of Appeals reversed a district court’s ruling that denied three engineering companies' motion to dismiss a man's negligence claims against them.
The Appellate Court opinion was written on June 19 by Justice Russell Lloyd, with Justices Jane Bland and Jennifer Caughey sitting on the panel for the case, stating the 127th District Court in Harris County erred in denying Jacobs’ motion.
“Because nothing exists in Perkin’s certificate of merit affidavit, or elsewhere in the record, indicating that Perkin possesses knowledge of Jacobs’s practice area, Perkin has not shown himself qualified to render the certificate of merit,” the opinion states.
Jacobs Field Services North America Inc., Jacobs Engineering Group Inc., and Jacobs Engineering Inc. filed an appeal after the 127th District Court in Harris County denied their motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s certificate of merit by a mechanical engineer. Jacobs claims the affidavit failed to satisfy the requirements under the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code because the engineer’s affidavit didn’t show he had any knowledge of Jacobs’ specific area.
Jacobs was hired by Exxon to develop and install programmable logic controllers and a “human machine interface for the 2013 Far East Coker unit cutting consoles upgrade,” the opinion states.
Troy Willeford filed a complaint against Jacobs and ExxonMobil in 2015 alleging negligence, gross negligence, strict liability and product defect. Willeford claimed he sustained injuries from responding and helping a co-worker, Maurice Ware, in an accident in the ExxonMobil Refinery in East Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Ware’s legs were amputated when a cable struck him while working. Ware filed suit and later settled his suit with the parties.
In his complaint, Willeford attached an affidavit written by Gregg S. Perkin, who is a registered professional engineer in the field of mechanical engineering. Perkins’ affidavit states he has personal knowledge “of the acceptable standards for the practice of providing design engineering services in the state of Louisiana which was the task to be performed by the engineering firm(s) referenced herein for ExxonMobil.”
Willeford claims that Jacobs is liable for “failure to implement certain safety features, mechanical design flaws, and the failure to conduct adequate site acceptance testing and other testing of the mechanical components," the opinion states.
The Appellate Court stated that the documents and record affirm that ExxonMobil did the testing for equipment at the FECU and site acceptance testing, not Jacobs.
Lloyd stated that the affidavit did not meet the requirements set by the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code.
“There is nothing in Perkin’s curriculum vitae or his affidavit showing that he possesses knowledge regarding the role that computer programming played in the system’s alleged failure… there is nothing in the record which indicates his expertise in the area of computer programing, design, or installation,” the opinion states.
The case has been remanded back to the trial court to determine whether to dismiss Willeford’s claims with or without prejudice.
Court of Appeals for the First District of Texas case number 01-17-00551-CV