# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
No. 1 5- 21 03

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
Len ny M. Cha pm an ; Trac y M. Ch ap m an

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff s

v.

Hil an d P art ne rs GP Hol di ng s, LLC, a fo rei gn co m pa ny; Hil an d P art ne rs , LP, a fo rei gn pa rtn ers hi p; Hil an d Op erat in g, LLC, a fo rei gn co m pa ny

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t s

----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----

Len ny M. Cha pm an ; Trac y M. Ch ap m an , as a ss ig ne es of Hi la nd Part ne rs GP Hol di ng s, LLC, Hil an d P art ne rs , LP, and Hil an d Op erat in g, LLC; Hil an d Ope rat in g, LLC

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Th ir d Pa rt y Pla in ti ff s - App el le e s

v.

Mi ss ou ri B as in W el l Se rv ic e, In c.

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Th ir d Pa rt y Def en da nt - App el la nt

B&B Heav y

Haul , LLC

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Th ir d Pa rt y Def en da nt

----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----Mi ss ou ri B as in W el l Se rv ic e, In c.

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Cr os s C la ima nt - App el la nt

v.

B&B Heav y

Haul , LLC

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Cr os s Def en da nt - App el le e

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
No. 1 5- 23 96

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
Len ny M. Cha pm an ; Trac y M. Ch ap m an

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff s

v.

Hil an d P art ne rs GP Hol di ng s, LLC, a fo rei gn co m pa ny; Hil an d P art ne rs , LP, a fo rei gn pa rtn ers hi p; Hil an d Op erat in g, LLC, a fo rei gn co m pa ny

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t s

----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----

Len ny M. Cha pm an ; Trac y M. Ch ap m an , as a ss ig ne es of Hi la nd Part ne rs GP Hol di ng s, LLC, Hil an d P art ne rs , LP, and Hil an d Op erat in g, LLC; Hil an d Ope rat in g, LLC

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Th ir d Pa rt y Pla in ti ff s - App el le e s

v.

Mi ss ou ri B as in W el l Se rv ic e, In c.

-2

-ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Th ir d Pa rt y Def en da nt - App el la nt

B&B Heav y

Haul , LLC

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Th ir d Pa rt y Def en da nt

----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----

Mi ss ou ri B as in W el l Se rv ic e, In c.

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Cr os s C la ima nt - App el la nt

v.

B&B Heav y

Haul , LLC

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Cr os s Def en da nt - App el le e

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal s fr om

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Dis tri ct of No rth Dako ta - Bi sm arck

__ __ __ __ __ __
Su bm it te d: Decem

be r 15 , 20 16 Fil ed : J ul y

14 , 20 17

__ __ __ __ __ __
Befo re KELLY and MURPHY, Ci rcu it Ju dg es , and MONTGOMERY, Dis tri ct 1 Ju dg e.

__ __ __ __ __ __ KELLY, Cir cu it Ju dg e.

The Hon or ab le Ann D. Mo nt go m ery, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e 1 Dis tri ct of M in ne so ta , si tt in g b y de si gn at io n.

-3

-In th is co ns ol id at ed ap pe al
, Mi ss ou ri Bas in W el l Se rv ic e, In c. (Mi ss ou ri Bas in )

ap pe al s fro m th e di st ric t co ur t’s gr an t of su m m ary jud gm en t to Len ny an d Tracy 2
Ch ap m an (th e Ch ap m an s) an d fro m th e d i s t r i ct co ur t’s ru li ng s on po st -jud gm en t

m ot io ns

. Hav in g ju r i s d ic ti on un de r 28 U.S.C. § 12 91 , we affi rm th e co ur t’s or de rs
gr an ti ng su m

m ary ju d g men t to th e Ch ap m an s, gr an ti ng th e Ch ap m an s’ Ru le 59 (e)

m ot io n, an d d en y in g M is so ur i Ba si n’s Ru le 59 (e) m ot io n.

I. Ba ck gr ou nd

Hil an d Part ne rs GP Hol di ng s, LLC, Hil an d Pa rt ne rs , L P, an d H ila

nd Ope rat in g, LLC (co ll ect iv el y , Hil an d) own an d op erat e a na tu ral ga s pl an t in W at fo rd Ci ty, Nor th
Dak ot a. Mi ss ou ri Bas in of fers tru ck in g s erv ic es to oi l an d ga s co m pa ni es in Nor th
Dak ot a. Hil an d en te red in to a Mas te r Serv ic e Co nt ract (Hil an d MSC ) wit h Mi ss ou ri
Bas in in 20 08 whe reb y Mi ss ou ri Bas in , a s “ Co nt ract or ,” ag reed to pe rfo rm va rio us

se rv ic es fo r Hil an d. As pa rt of th e ag reem en t, Mi ss ou ri Bas in ag reed to “ in de m ni fy
, de fen d an d sa ve ha rm le ss Hil an d Gro u p

. . . fro m an d ag ai ns t an y an d al l cl ai m s, de m an ds
, jud gm en ts , de fen se co st s, or su it s

. . . in a n y way , di rect ly or in di rect ly,
ari si ng ou t of or rel at ed to th e p e r f or m an ce of th is Co nt ract .” The Hil an d MSC
in cl ud ed an Okl ah om a ch oi ce-o f-l aw pr ov is io n.

B&B Heav y Hau l, LLC ( B&B ) en te red in to a Mas te r Serv ic es Co nt ract wit h
Mi ss ou ri Bas in (B& B MSC ) in May 20 11
, in whi ch B&B
, as “ Carr ie r” ag reed “ to
pr ov id e th e tra ns po rta ti on se rv ic es req ui red by [Mi ss ou ri Bas in ] an d Cu st om er.” In th e B&B MSC
, B&B ag reed to “ in de m ni fy
, de fen d, an d sa ve ha rm le ss [Mi ss ou ri
Bas in ] an d th e Cu st om er fro m an y an d al l cl ai m s, de m an ds
, jud gm en ts , de fen se co st s,

or su it s

. . . in an y way, d i r e ct ly or in di rect ly, ari si ng ou t of or rel at ed to th e

The Hon or ab le Dan ie l L. Hov la nd
, Ch ie f Ju dg e, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Co ur t 2 fo r th e Dis tri ct of No rth Dako ta

.
-4

-pe rfo rm an ce of th is Co nt ract .” The B&B MSC pr ov id ed fo r th e ap pl ic at io n of Nor th

Dak ot a la w.

On O c to be r 18
, 20 11
, Hil an d req ue st ed Mi ss ou ri Bas in rem ov e wate r fro m

co nd en sa te tan ks at th e W at fo rd pl an t. Mi ss ou ri B as in co nt act ed B&B, wh ic h s en t Len ny Ch ap m an to th e g as pl an t. Ch ap m an arri ve d sh or tl y aft er m id ni gh t. He an d

an em pl oyee of Hil an d be ga n c o n n ect in g th e ta nk to th e B&B tru ck th at Ch ap m an

was dri vi ng . An ex pl os io n o ccu rred an d C ha pm an was s eri ou sl y in jure d.

Ch ap m an an d hi s wife
, Tr a c y, fil ed an act io n ag ai ns t Hil an d, al le gi ng

ne gl ig en ce an d lo ss of co ns or ti um

. Hil an d fil ed a th ird -p ar t y co m pl ai nt ag ai ns t Mi ss ou ri Bas in an d B&B
, co nt en di ng th ey were co nt ract ua ll y ob li ga te d to in de m ni fy

an d de fen d Hil an d. Mi ss ou ri Bas in cro ss -cl a im ed ag ai ns t B&B
, se ek in g a de fen se

an d i nd em

ni fic at io n i f it was re qu ire d t o i nd em ni fy Hil an d.

B&B fil ed a m ot io n fo r pa rti al su m m ary jud gm en t, co nt en di ng th e B&B MSC di d no t req ui re it to in de m ni fy Mi ss ou ri Bas in or Hil an d fo r Hil an d’s ne gl ig en ce. On Sep te m be r 10
, 20 14
, th e di st ric t co ur t gr an te d B&B ’s m ot i o n, di sm is si ng Hil an d’s
th ird -p art y

co m pl ai nt ag ai ns t B& B an d Mis so ur i Basi n’s cros s- cl ai m ag ai ns t B& B.
As fo r Hil an d’s th ird -p art y co m pl ai nt , th e co ur t c o n c l u d e d a s a m at te r of la w th at B&B ha d no le ga l du ty un de r th e B&B MSC to i n d e mn i fy Hil an d fo r it s own

ne gl ig en ce. The co ur t furt he r fo un d t ha t ev en if t he B&B M SC co ul d b e co ns tru ed

to req ui re B&B to in de m

ni fy Hil an d fo r it s own ne gl ig en ce, th e co nt ract was vo id an d

un en fo rcea bl e un de r Nor th Dak ot a la w. W it h reg ard to Mi ss ou ri Bas in ’s cro ss -cl ai m , th e co ur t co nc lu de d as a m at te r of la w th at B&B ha d no le ga l ob li ga ti on to in de m ni fy
Mi ss ou ri Bas in fo r an y in de m ni fic at io n ob li ga ti on s Mi ss o u r i Bas in m ig ht ha ve to Hil an d.

On Octo be r 1, 20 14 , t he Ch ap m an s en te re d in to a “ Co nf id en ti al Rel eas e an d
Set tl em en t Agr eem en t an d Addend um ” (Set tl em en t Agr eem en t) wit h Hil an d, se tt li ng

-5

-th ei r cl ai m s ag ai ns t Hil an d fo r $1 0 m il li on

. Of th at am ou nt , $3 m il li on was to be pa id

by Hil an d an d $7 m il li o n b y H i l a n d’s in su rers

. As pa rt of th e se tt le m en t, Hil an d

as si gn ed al l i t s i n d em

ni ty cl ai m s ag ai ns t Mi ss ou ri Bas in to th e Ch ap m an s. The
C h a p m an s fil ed an am en de d th ird -p art y co m pl ai nt , as se rti ng , “ as as si gn ees o f [Hil an d],” th e “ rig h t t o p u rs ue th e Hil an d Defen da nt s’ in de m ni ty cl ai m s ag ai ns t Mi ss ou ri Bas in ari si ng fro m th e Mi ss ou ri Bas in MSC .” The Ch ap m an s s o u g h t a jud gm en t “ fo r al l am ou nt s th at th e Hil an d Defen da nt s, or ot he rs on th ei r be ha lf, ha ve
pa id or wi ll pa y ” to th e Ch ap m an s u nd er t he Set tl em en t Ag reem en t.

The Ch ap m an s an d Mi ss ou ri Bas in fil ed cro ss -m ot io ns fo r su m m ary jud gm en t. The pa rti es di sp ut ed whe th er Okl ah om a la w or Nor th Dak ot a la w go ve rn ed th e Hil an d MS C

. A p p lying Okl ah om a la w, th e di st ric t co ur t fo un d th e in de m ni ty
pr ov is io n in th e Hil an d MSC fu ll y en fo rcea bl e. On Apr il 23
, 20 15
, th e co ur t en te red

an ord er g ran ti ng th e Ch ap m an s’ m ot io n for su m m ary jud gm en t, s ta ti ng : “ Mi ss ou ri
Bas in is ob li ga te d to in de m ni fy Thi rd -Par ty Pl ai nt iff s fo r al l am ou nt s th at ha ve be en
pa id or wil l be pa id as a res ul t of th e Co nf id en ti al Rel eas e an d Set tl em en t Agr eem en t

an d t he Add en du m .” The ju dg m en t was en te red on Apri l 2 4, 2 01 5.

Bo th th e Ch ap m an s an d Mi ss ou ri Bas in fil ed po st

- ju dg m en t m ot io ns

. The Ch ap m an s req ue st ed th e co ur t red uc e it s jud gm en t to a su m cert ai n: $1 0 m il li on pl us in te res t. Mi ss ou ri Bas in op po se d th e Ch ap m an s’ m ot io n, co nt en di ng it s in de m ni ty ob li ga ti on was li m it ed to $3 m il li on —t he am ou nt Hil an d di rect ly co nt rib ut ed to th e

se tt le m en t. In it s po st -jud gm en t m ot io n, Mi ss ou ri Bas in as ke d th e co ur t to reco ns id er it s Sep te m

be r 20 14 or de r gr an ti ng su m m ary jud gm en t in fav or of B&B an d it s Apr il
20 15 ord er gr an ti ng su m

m ary jud gm en t in fav or of th e Ch ap m an s. Mi ss ou ri B as in

arg ue d th e two or de rs were erro ne ou s an d co nt ra di ct or y

. The co ur t gr an te d th e Ch ap m an s’ m ot io n an d de ni ed Mi ss ou ri Bas in ’s m ot io n, an d i s su ed an am en de d jud gm en t t he ne xt da y

.

-6

-II . Disc us si on

Mi ss ou ri B as in ap pe al s th e di st ric t cou rt’s gran t of sum m ary jud gm en t t o t he Ch ap m an s, as se rti ng th e di st ric t co ur t erre d in ap pl y in g Okl ah om a rat he r th an Nor th
Dak ot a la w in co ns tru in g th e Hil an d MSC

. Mi ss ou ri Bas in al so co nt en ds th e di st ric t

co ur t er red in it s p os t-ju dg m en t ru li ng s.

A. Sum m ar y J udg m ent

“ W e rev ie w de no vo a di st ric t co ur t’s gr an t of su m m ary jud gm en t, vi ewin g th e

ev id en ce in th e li gh t m os t favo rab le to th e no nm ov in g pa rty.” Am

. Fi re & Cas

. Co

. v. Hegel
, 84 7 F.3 d 95 6, 95 8 (8t h Cir. 20 17 ) (q uo ti ng Bark le y , In c. v. Gabri el Bro s., 82 9 F .3d 10 30 , 10 38 (8t h Cir. 2 01 6) ). Summ ary jud gm en t i s ap pr op ria te if t he re i s

“ no di sp ut e of m at eri al fact an d reas on ab le fact fin de rs co ul d no t fin d in fav or of th e

no nm ov in g par ty.” Id

. (q uo ti ng Sh rab le v. Eato n Cor p., 69 5 F.3d 76 8, 77 0– 71 (8 th Ci r. 20 12 )).

The pa rti es ag ree th at Nor th Dak ot a ch oi ce-o f-l aw ru le s ap pl y in th is cas e. See
In a c o m C o r p

. v. Sear s, Ro eb uc k & Co
., 25 4 F.3 d 68 3, 68 7 (8 th Ci r. 20 01 ) (wh en si tt in g in di ve rs it y juri sd ic ti on , di st ric t co ur t ap pl ie s th e co nf li ct -o f-l aw ru le s fo r th e
st at e in whi ch it si ts ). Rel y in g on th e ch oi ce-o f-l aw pr ov is io n in th e Hil an d MSC
, th e di st ric t co ur t ap pl ie d Okl ah om a la w to de te rm in e th e en fo rcea bi li ty of th e in de m ni ty
pr ov is io n in th e MSC

. See Sn or tl an d v. Lars on , 36 4 N.W .2d 67
, 68 –6 9 (N.D. 19 85 ) (ap pl y in g Mi nn es ot a la w to co nt ract cas e be cau se th e pa rti es ch os e Mi nn es ot a la w);
Am

. Hard ware Mu t. In s. v. D a i r yl a n d In s., 30 4 N.W .2d 68 7, 68 9 n.1 (N.D. 19 81 ) (n ot in g th at “ [p ]arti es m ay st ip ul at e as to ch oi ce of law”); see al so Mac qu ari e Ban k Ltd

. v. Kni ck el
, 79 3 F.3 d 92 6, 93 3 (8 th Ci r. 20 15 ) (“ W e be li ev e t h at th e Nor th
Dak ot a Su pr em e Co ur t wou ld res ol ve th is di sp ut e un de r Tex as la w, as cal le d for by
th e Cred it Agr eem en t.”)

. Bec au se th e di st ric t co ur t de ci de d th at th e Hil an d MSC was
go ve rn ed by Okl ah om a la w, it co nc lu de d th at “ an y arg um en ts ba se d on Nor th Dak ot a

-7

-la w ne ces sa ril y fa i l

. ” W e “ rev ie w de no vo th e di st ric t co ur t’s ch oi ce-o f-l aw

de te rm in at io n.” DCS San it at io n Mg m t., In c. v. Cas ti ll o, 43 5 F.3 d 89 2, 89 5 (8 th Ci r. 20 06 ). W e li ke wis e rev ie w de no vo th e co ur t’s “ in te rp ret at io n of Nor th Dak ot a la w.”
Kov ari k v . Am . Fam il y

Ins . Grp., 1 08 F.3d 96 2, 9 64 (8t h C ir. 1 99 7)

.

Mi ss ou ri Bas in ack no wled ge s th at th e pa rti es ch os e Okl ah om a la w to go ve rn di sp ut es un de r th e Hil an d MSC an d co nc ed es th at Nor th Dak ot a co ur ts ge ne ral ly ho no r ch oi ce-o f-l aw pr ov is io ns

. Mi ss ou ri Bas in do es no t c h a l l en ge th e di st ric t

co ur t’s co nc lu si on th at th e Hil an d MSC in de m ni ty pr ov is io n is en fo rcea bl e un de r Okl ah o ma la w. Mi ss ou ri Bas in as se rts , ho wev er, th at ho no rin g th e ch oi ce-o f-l aw
pr ov is io n in th is cas e is co nt ra r y t o pu bl ic po li cy , as ex pr es se d in Nor th Dak ot a’s

m ot or carr ie r an ti -in de m

ni fic at io n st at ut e. See N.D. Cen t. Co de § 22 -0 2- 10

. Sect io n 22 -0 2- 10 (2 ) pr ov id es , in pa rt:

Not wit hs ta nd in g a ny pro vi si on of l aw to th e co nt rary, an y po rti on of a pr ov is io n, cl au se , co ve na nt , or ag reem en t co nt ai ne d in
, co ll at eral to , or affe ct in g a m ot or carr ie r co nt ract whi ch pu rp or ts to in de m ni fy
, de fen d, 3

S ect io n 22 -0 2- 10 is en ti tl ed : “ In de m ni ty ag reem en t in m ot or carr i e r 3
tra ns po rta ti on co nt r act s vo id ,” an d th e te rm “ m ot or carr ie r tra ns po rta ti on co nt ract ” is us ed in ot he r pa rts of th e se ct io n. See N.D. Cen t. Co de § 22 -0 2- 10 (1 )(a) (d efi ni ng

“ m ot or carr ie r tra ns po rta ti on co nt ract ”); id

. § 22 -0 2- 10 (1 )(b ) (cl ari fy in g th at th e te rm

“ pr om is ee” “ do es no t in cl ud e a m ot or c a rri er th at is pa rty to a m ot or carr ie r tra ns po rta ti on co nt ract wit h th e pr om is ee”) . Neit he r pa rty has arg ue d t ha t b y us in g th e te rm “ m ot or carr ie r co nt ract ” in § 2 2

- 0 2

- 1 0( 2)
, th e Nor th Dak ot a le gi sl at ur e

m ean t so m et hi ng di ffer en t th an a “ m ot or carr ie r tra ns po rta ti on co nt ract .” Si m il arl y , we se e no reas on th at th e Nor th Dak ot a Su p r em e Co ur t wou ld co ns tru e th e te rm

“ m ot or carr ie r co nt ract ” to m ean so meth in g di ffer en t th an “ m ot or carr ie r tra ns po rta ti on co nt ra c t ” ; a n d we no te “ m ot or carr ie r co nt ract ” is no t ot he rwis e d e f i ne d in th e st at ut e See So ren so n v. Fel to n, 79 3 N.W .2d 79 9, 80 3 (N.D. 20 11 ) (“ St at ut es m

us t be co ns tru ed to av oi d ab su rd res ul ts .” (q uo ti ng Tos o v

. W or kf or ce Safe ty & In s., 7 12 N.W .2d 31 2, 31 8 (N.D. 2 00 6) ). Fo r pu rp os es of th is ap pe al , we

us e th e te rm s i nt erch an ge ab ly.

-8

-or ho ld ha rm le ss , or ha s t h e e ffec t of in de m ni fy in g, de fen di ng , or ho ld in g har m le ss , th e pr om is ee from or ag ai ns t an y li ab il it y fo r lo ss or da m ag e res ul ti ng fro m th e ne gl ig en ce or in te nt io na l act s or om is si on s of th e pr om is ee is vo id a n d u ne nf or ceab le to th e ex te nt th at th e lo ss or da m ag e:

a. Occu rs du rin g th e m ot or carr ie r’s pr es en ce on th e pr om is ee’s pr em is es an d is cau se d by o r r e s ul ts fro m th e ne gl ig en t or in te nt io na l ac ts or o m is si on s o f th e p ro m is ee[.]

N.D. Cen t. Co de § 22 -0 2- 10 (2 ). Mi ss ou ri Bas in arg ue s th e Hil an d MSC fit s al l th ree el em en ts se t fo r t h in § 22 -0 2- 10 (2 ): (1 ) th e MSC is a m ot or carr ie r tra ns po rta ti on

co nt ract ; (2 ) th e ha rm oc cu rred whi le th e m ot or carr i e r w a s o n th e pr om is ee’s

pr em is es ; an d (3 ) th e h arm was c au se d b y

th e n eg li ge nc e o f th e p ro m is ee.

As rel ev an t he re, th e st at ut e d efi ne s a “ m ot or carr ie r tra ns po rta ti on co nt ract ”

as “ a c o nt ract , a gr eem en t, or un de rs ta nd in g co ve rin g th e tra ns po rta ti on of pr op ert y f o r c o m pe ns at io n or hi re by th e m ot or carr ie r

. . . or a se rv ic e in ci de nt al to act i v i t y de sc rib ed in th is su bd iv is io n, in cl ud in g st or ag e of pr op ert y .” N.D. Cen t. Co de § 22

- 02 -1 0 ( 1 ) ( a )

. Bel ow, Mi ss ou ri Bas in as ke d th e di st ric t co ur t to fin d th e in de m ni fic at io n pr ov is io n in th e Hil an d MSC ag ai ns t pu bl ic p o l i c y an d th us

u ne nf or ceab le un de r § 22 -0 2- 10 (1 )(a)
, bu t fai le d to ad dr es s why th e Hil a n d M S C sh ou ld b e c o n s id ered a “ m ot or carr ie r tra ns po rta ti on co nt ract ” in th e fir st in st an ce. On ap pe al
, Mi ss ou ri Bas in si m pl y as se rts th at th e Hil an d M S C i s a “ m ot or carr ie r
tra ns po rta ti on co nt ract ” be cau se a si gn ifi can t pa rt of Mi ss ou ri Bas in ’s bu si ne ss is of feri ng tru ck in g se rv ic es to ga s co m pa ni es to ha u l p r o p e r ty fo r hi re, an d Mi ss ou ri
Bas in su bc on tra ct ed wit h B &B sp eci fic al ly to “ pr ov id e th e tra ns po rta ti on se rv ic es

r e qu ire d by” Mi ss ou ri Bas in an d it s “ cu st om er.” Mi ss ou ri Bas in ’s al te rn at iv e

as se rti on is th at th e Hil an d MSC “ co ve r[ed ]” a “ se rv i c e i n ci de nt al to th e act iv it y de sc rib ed in th is su bs ect io n” —t he tra ns po rta ti on of pr op ert y fo r hi re— be cau se Mi ss ou ri Bas in ’s act io ns in req ue st in g B&B to ha ul wate r fro m th e co nd en sa te ta nk s
at th e Hil an d pl an t on Octo be r 18
, 20 11
, were “ a se rv ic e in ci de nt al ” t o B & B’s

-9

-ha ul in g act iv it ie s un de r th e B & B M S C—a co nt ract th e di st ric t co ur t fo un d to be a

m ot or carr ie r co nt r a c t

. Tho ug h Nor th Dak ot a en act ed it s m ot or carr ie r an ti

4
in de m ni fic at i on st at ut e in 20 09
, ne it he r si de ha s po in te d us to an y rep or te d cas es
ap pl y in g it s pr ov is io ns an d w e h a v e fo un d no ne

. Our ta sk th en is to de te rm in e whe th er Nor th Dak ot a co ur ts wou ld in te rp ret th e Hil an d MSC to be a “ m ot or carr ie r
tra ns po rta ti on co nt ract ” un de r § 22 -0 2- 10

. See Kvo rari k, 10 8 F.3 d at 96 4 (“ If th e N o r th Dak ot a Su pr em e Co ur t ha s no t sp ok en on [th e] is su e[], we m us t at te m p t t o
pr ed ic t wh at th at co ur t wo ul d d eci de if i t wer e fac ed wit h [i t].”).

N o r t h Dak ot a co ur ts co ns tru e writ te n co nt ract s to gi ve effe ct to th e pa rti es ’
in te nt whe n th e co nt ract was ex ecu te d, as cert ai ni ng th e in te nt fro m th e writ te n

co nt ract al on e, if po ss ib le

. Ras ni c v. Co no co Ph il li ps Co
., 85 4 N.W .2d 65 9, 66 1 (N.D.
20 14 ) (ci ti ng N.D. Cen t. Co de §§ 9- 07 -0 3 an d 9- 07 -0 4)

. W or ds in a writ te n co nt ract are gi ve n th ei r pl ai n, or di na ry , an d com m on ly un de rs to od m ean in g “ un le ss th ey are

us ed by th e pa rti es in a te ch ni cal se ns e or a sp eci al m ean in g is gi ve n to th em by

us ag e.” Sp eci al iz ed Co nt ract in g, In c. v. St

. Pau l Fi re & Mar in e In s

. , 8 2 5 N

. W. 2d
87 2, 8 77 (N.D. 20 12 ) (ci ti ng N.D. Cent . Cod e § 9-0 7- 09 ).

Not hi ng in th e Hil an d MSC id en ti f i e s i t as a co nt ract co ve rin g th e
t r a n s p o r t at io n of pr op ert y fo r hi re. The re is no refe ren ce to a “ m ot or carr ie r” or to
tra ns po rta ti on se rv ic es

. Not ab ly, th ere is no th in g in th e MSC to in di cat e th at it was
ta il or ed to Mi ss ou ri Bas in sp eci fic al ly, as op po se d to an y ot he r co nt ract or or ve nd or wi t h w ho m Hil an d m ig ht co nt ract

. In th e Hil an d MSC
, Mi ss ou ri Bas in ag rees , as

“ Co nt ract or ,” th at it wil l, “ fro m ti m e to ti m e,

. . . pe rf o r m cert ai n wor k or fu rn is h

cert ai n se rv ic es to Hil an d. The job s co nt em pl at ed are a n y s u c h wor k or se rv ic es
pe rfo rm ed by Co nt ract or .” Exh ib it A, at ta ch ed to th e Hil an d MSC
, li st s th e va rio us

The di st ric t co ur t co nc lu d e d
, wit ho ut ex pl an at io n, th at th e Hil an d MSC 4

“ can no t be de sc rib ed as a m ot or carr ie r co nt ract , an d Mis so ur i Basi n was no t act in g

as a m ot or carr ie r” o n Oct ob er 1 8, 2 01 1.

-1 0-m in im

um in su ra nc e req ui rem en ts th at th e di ffer en t types of co nt ract or s or ve nd or s who si gn a m as te r se rv i ce co nt ract wit h Hil an d m us t m ai nt ai n. Exh ib it A li st s 26 types of co n t ract or s an d ve nd or s, in cl ud in g carp en te rs , el ect ric ia ns , ga te gu ard s,

su rv ey or s, an d weld ers

. The r e q u i r ed in su ran ce co ve rag e in cl ud es co ve rag e an y
contr ac tor m igh t be ex pe ct ed to m ai nt ai n, su ch as wor ke r’s co m pe ns at io n, em

pl oyer’s
li ab il it y , co m

pr eh en si ve ge ne ral li ab il it y , an d au to m ob il e li ab il it y , bu t no in su ran ce

a m ot or carr ie r m ig ht be ex pe ct ed to m ai nt ai n, s uc h a s ca rg o l ia bi li ty ins ur an ce.

In co nt ras t, the B&B M SC— a co nt ract th at was un di sp ut ed ly a m ot or carr ie r
tr an spor ta tio n cont ract —s pe ci fic al ly id en ti fie d B&B as an “ au th or iz ed fo r-h ire m oto r

carr ie r wit h th e ne ces s a r y a ut ho rit y an d li cen se s to op erat e in in te rs ta te an d/ or in tra st at e co m

m erce , an d is ot he rwis e qu al ifi ed
, co m pe te nt an d av ai la bl e to pr ov id e th e tra ns po rta ti on se rv ic es req ui red by Mi ss ou ri Bas in an d Cu st om er.” In th e MSC
, B&B ag rees to a n um

be r of co nd it io ns rel ev an t to be in g a co nt ract fo r-h ire m ot or

carr ie r, i n c l u di ng th at it wil l co m pl y wit h al l la ws “ reg ard in g th e pr ov is io n of

. . . t r a n s p o r ta ti on se rv ic es ,” th at it wil l en su re “ it s ve hi cl es an d dr iv ers fu ll y

co m pl y wit h th e Fed eral Mo to r Carr ie r Safe ty Reg ul at io ns es ta bl is he d by th e DOT,” th at it wou ld ha ve “ th e so le an d ex cl us iv e care , cu st od y an d co nt ro l of each te nd ered sh ip m en t fro m th e ti m e it is de li ve red

. . . fo r tra ns po rta ti on un ti l de li ve red ,” an d th at it ass um ed “ th e li ab il it y

of a co m m on carri er u nd er 4 9 U.S.C. § 14 70 6.”

Unl ik e th e B&B MSC
, th e Hil an d MSC la ck s ex pr es s la ng ua ge id en ti fy in g it

as a co nt ract co ve rin g “ th e tra ns po rta ti on of pr op ert y fo r co m pe ns at io n or hi re by th e

m ot or carr ie r, ” or “ a se rv ic e in ci de nt al to ” su ch act iv it y

. W e co nc lu de th e Hil an d
MSC
, whi ch co ve red m

ul ti pl e se rv ic es no t li m it ed to tra ns po rta ti on , is no t a “ m ot or

carr ie r tra ns po rta ti on co nt ract ” un de r Nor th Dak ot a la w. Bec au se it is no t, N.D. Cen t. Co de § 22- 02-10 do es no t ap pl y

. Acco rd in gl y , ho no rin g th e Okl ah om a ch oi ce-o f-l aw
pr ov is io n in th e Hil an d MSC do es no t vi ol at e a fu nd am en ta l pu bl ic po li cy of Nor th
Dak ot a.

-1 1-B. Rule 59 (e) moti on s

Fo ll owi ng th e co ur t’s e n try of su m m ary jud gm en t, Mi ss ou ri Bas in an d th e Ch ap m an s bo th fil ed Ru le 59 (e) m ot io ns to al te r or am en d th e jud gm en t. The co ur t de ni ed Mi ss ou ri Bas in ’s m ot io n bu t gr an te d th e Ch ap m an s’ m ot io n. Mi ss ou ri Bas in

ap pe al s bo th ru li ng s. Dis tri ct c ou rts en joy br oa d di sc ret io n to al te r or am en d jud gm en ts un de r R u l e 5 9 ( e), an d we rev ers e on ly fo r a cl ear ab us e of di sc ret io n. Mat th ew v. Un um

Life I ns . Co. o f Am ., 63 9 F .3d 85 7, 8 63 (8t h C ir. 2 01 1)

.

“ Fed eral Ru le of Ci vi l Pro ced ur e 59 (e) was ad op te d to cl ari fy a di st ric t co ur t’s

po wer to co rrec t it s own m is ta ke s in th e ti m e pe rio d im m ed ia te ly fo ll owi ng en try of jud gm en t.” In no va ti ve Hom e Heal t h C a r e, In c. v. P.T.–O.T. Ass oc s. of th e Bl ack
Hil ls
, 14 1 F.3 d 12 84
, 12 86 (8 th Ci r. 19 98 ). Fed eral co ur ts ge ne ral ly us e Ru le 59 (e)

“ to su pp or t re c o n s i d e rat io n of m at te rs pr op erl y en co m pa ss ed in a de ci si on on th e

m eri ts .” W hi te v. N.H. Dep’t o f Em p’t Se c., 45 5 U.S. 4 45 , 4 51 (1 98 2)

. “ An ab us e of di sc ret io n wil l on ly be fo un d if th e di st ric t co ur t’s jud gm en t was ba se d on cl earl y

erro ne ou s fact ua l fin di ng s or erro ne ou s le ga l co nc lus io ns .” Mat th ew, 63 9 F.3 d at 86 3 (q uo ti ng Inn ov at iv e Hom e Heal th Care , 14 1 F .3d at 1 28 6)

.

In it s or de r gr a n t i n g th e Ch ap m an s su m m ary jud gm en t, th e di st ric t co ur t

or de red Mi ss ou ri Bas in to in de m ni fy th e Ch ap m an s “ fo r al l su m s th at ha ve be en pa id

or wil l be pa id ” as a res ul t o f t h e C h a p m an s’ s et tl em en t wit h Hil an d. In th ei r Ru le
59 (e) m ot io n, th e Ch ap m an s req ue st ed th e co ur t is su e a su pp le m en ta l jud gm en t
st at in g a su m c e r ta in

. The co ur t gr an te d th e Ch ap m an s’ req ue st , cl ari fy in g th at by

us in g th e la ng ua ge “ al l am ou nt s th at ha ve be en pa id or wil l be pa id ,” it in te nd ed “ th at Mi ss ou ri Bas in in de m

ni fy th e Ch ap m an s f

o r t h e fu ll am ou nt of th e se tt le m en t, in cl ud in g th os e am ou nt s pa id by Hil an d’s in su rers .” The co ur t ex pl ai ne d th at by reject in g Hil an d’s te nd er of de fen se an d req ue st fo r in de m ni fic at io n, Mi ss ou ri Bas in lo st it s rig ht t o c o n t ro l th e li ti ga ti on an d be cam e ob li ga te d to rei m bu rs e th e Ch ap m an s, as as si gn ees of Hil an d an d it s in su r e r s , f o r th e fu ll se tt le m en t to whi ch

-1 2-Hil an d an d it s in su rers ha d ag reed —$ 10 m il li on

. Tha t jud gm en t w a s no t cl earl y

erro ne ou s. See Mu sk og ee Ti tl e Co . v. Fi rs t Nat ’l Ban k & Trus t Co . of M us ko ge e, 89 4 P.2 d 11 48
, 11 51 (Ok la

. Ci v. App

. 19 95 ) (h ol di ng th at a pa rti al ly su b r o g at ed
in su rer an d it s in su red m ay joi n as co -p la in ti ffs in an act io n to reco ve r th e en ti re lo ss fro m a th ird pa rty); Kell y -Sp rin gf ie ld Tire Co

. v. Mo bi l Oil Co rp ., 55 1 P.2 d 67 1, 67 5 (Ok la

. Ci v. App

. 19 75 ) (“ [I]n Okl ah om a[,]

. . . whe re th e in de m ni to r de ni es li ab il it y

un de r th e in de m

ni ty co nt ract an d refu se s to as su m e th e de fen se of th e cl ai m , th en th e in de m ni te e is in fu ll ch arg e of th e m at te r an d m ay m ak e a g o o d f a i t h se tt le m en t wit ho ut as su m in g th e ris k of be in g ab le to pr ov e ab so lu te le ga l li ab il it y or th e act ua l

am ou nt of th e da m ag e.”) (in t e r n a l q uo ta ti on om it te d) ; se e al so Okl a. St at

. ti t. 15
, § 42 7.5 (“ If, aft er req ue st , th e pe rs on in de m ni fy in g ne gl ect s to de f

e n d t h e pe rs on in de m ni fie d, a reco ve ry ag ai ns t th e la tt er, su ffer ed by hi m in go od fai th
, is co nc lu si ve in hi s fav or ag ai ns t th e fo rm er.”)

. The di st ric t co ur t d i d n o t ab us e it s di sc ret io n in

gr an ti ng th e Ch ap m an s’ Rul e 5 9( e) m ot io n.

Mi ss ou ri Bas in al so arg ue s th e di st ric t co ur t erre d in de nyin g it s Ru le 59 (e)

m ot io n, in whi ch it so ug ht r e c o n s i d erat io n of th e di st ric t co ur t’s or de rs gr an ti ng

su m m ary jud gm en t in fav or of B&B an d th e Ch ap m an s. Mi ss ou ri Bas in arg ue d th at th e two or de rs were erro ne ou s an d co nt rad ic to ry

. The di st ric t co ur t fo un d th e m ot io n

un ti m el y , bu t co nc lu de d th at , ev en if it was no t un ti m el y , th e Ru le 59 (e) m ot io n was

an im pe rm is si bl e at te m

pt to rai se ne w arg um en ts th at co ul d ha ve be en rai se d earl ie r

an d, b ecau se th e o rd ers were n ot in co ns is te nt , lac ke d m eri t.

F e d e ral Ru le of Ci vi l Pro ced ur e 59 (e) al lo ws an y pa rty ag gr ie ve d by a jud gm en t to fil e a m ot io n to al te r or am en d th e jud gm en t “ no la te r th an 28 da y s aft er”

t h e ju d g men t ha s be en en te red

. Fed

. R. Ci v. P. 59 (e). Co ur ts are no t al lo we d t o

ex te nd th e twen ty-eig ht da y d e ad li ne

. Fed

. R. Ci v. P. 6( b) (2 ). The di st ric t co ur t

en te red jud gm en t on Apr il 24
, 20 15

. Mi ss ou ri Bas in fil ed a m ot io n for leav e to fil e do cu m en ts un de r se al on May 22
, 20 15
, a t t a c h i n g it s Ru le 59 (e) m ot io n an d

m em or an du m in su pp or t, an d th e cl erk do ck et ed th e m ot io n as well as th e at ta ch m en ts

-1 3-on May 22
, 20 15

. The co ur t gr an te d Mi ss ou ri Bas in ’s m ot io n fo r le av e to fil e un de r

se al on May 26
, 20 15
, an d Mi ss ou ri Bas in fil ed th e Ru le 59 (e) an d m em or an du m in

su pp or t on May 29
, 20 15

. Mi ss ou ri Bas in as se rts th at al l th e ru le s req ui re is th at th e Ru le 59 (e) m ot io n and m em or an du m be de li ve red to th e cl erk an d s o i ts Ru le 59 (e)

m ot io n was ti m el y

. See Fed

. R. Ci v. P. 5( d) (2 ) (ex pl ai ni ng th at “ [a] pa pe r is fil ed by de li ve rin g it

. . . to th e cl erk ”). B&B as se rts th at th e m ot io n was un ti m el y be cau se th e
req ue st th at th e do cu m en ts be fil ed was in th e m em or an du m rat he r th an th e m ot io n. Neit he r pa rty ha s di rect ed us to a lo cal ru le or lo cal pr act ic e in di cat i n g w he th er a

m ot io n do ck et ed as an at ta ch m en t to a m ot io n to fil e un de r se al is co ns id ered “ fil ed ”
in th e Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Co ur t of Nor th Dak ot a. Fo r pu rp os es of th is ap pe al
, we

as su m e wit ho ut de ci di ng th at a m ot io n an d m em or an du m do ck et ed as at ta ch m en ts to

a moti on to fil e un de r se al are “ fil ed ” on th e da y th e at ta ch m en ts are do ck et ed , a n d

we pr oc eed to th e m eri ts

.

I n it s Ru le 59 (e) m ot io n, Mi ss ou ri Bas in sh ift ed fo cu s to th e B& B M S C
, arg ui ng th at it s cl ai m ag ai ns t B&B fo r in de m ni ty was wit hi n th e sc op e of th e in de m ni fic at io n p ro vi si on of t he B&B M SC. Tha t co nt ract pr ov id ed in de m ni ty for cl ai m s “ di rect ly or in di rect ly

. . . rel at ed to th e pe rfo rm an ce of” th e B&B MSC
, an d
Mi ss ou ri Bas in ne wly co nt en de d th at it s in de m ni ty ob li ga ti on to Hil an d is an in di rect cl ai m th at is wit hi n th e sc op e of th e B&B MSC in de m ni ty pr ov is io n. B&B co un te rs th at th is arg um en t is an in ap pr op ria te at te m pt to rai se a ne w arg um en t th at Mi ss ou ri
Bas in co ul d ha ve m ad e in op po si ti on to B&B ’s pa rti al m ot io n fo r su m m ary jud gm en t. See Uni te d St at es v. Met ro

. St

. Lou is Sewer Dis t., 44 0 F.3 d 93 0, 93 3 (8 th Ci r. 20 06 ) (Ru le 59 (e) “ m ot io ns can no t b e u s ed to in tro du ce ne w ev id en ce, te nd er ne w le ga l
th eo rie s, or rai se arg um en ts whi ch co ul d ha ve be en of fere d or rai se d pr io r to en try of jud gm en t.” ( qu ot in g In no va ti ve Hom e Heal th Care , 14 1 F .3d at 1 28 6) ).

Mi ss ou ri Bas in co nc ed es th at it di d no t rai se th is arg um en t un ti l it s Ru le 59 (e)

m ot io n, bu t arg ue s th at it co ul d no t do so un ti l aft er th e di st ric t co ur t is su ed it s Apr il
23
, 20 15
, ru li ng on th e Ch ap m an s’ m ot io n fo r su m m ary jud gm en t be cau se , acco rd in g

-1 4-to Mi ss ou ri Bas in
, th e ru li ng was in co ns is te nt wit h it s pr io r or de r on B&B ’s m ot io n

fo r pa rti al su m

m ary jud gm en t. Bu t no th in g ab ou t th e di st ric t co ur t’s or de rs pr ev en te d
Mi ss ou ri Bas in fro m as se rti ng in it s e a r l i e r fil in gs th at it s in de m ni ty ob li ga ti on to Hil an d was an in di rect cl ai m wit hi n th e sc op e of th e B&B MSC

. In an y ev en t, th e

ru li ng s— whi ch ex am in ed two se pa rat e co nt ract s, on e go ve rn ed by Nor th Dak ota la w ,
an d on e by Okl ah om a la w—ar e no t in co ns is te nt

. The di st ric t co ur t di d no t ab us e it s di sc ret io n in de nyin g Mi ss ou ri Bas in ’s R ul e 59 (e) m ot io n. See Mat th ew, 63 9 F.3 d

at 86 3.

II I. Co ncl us io n

Fo r th e reas on s se t fo rth ab ov e, we affi rm th e di st ric t co ur t’s gr an t of su m m ary jud gm en t to th e Ch ap m an s on th ei r th ird -p art y co m pl ai nt an d it s or de rs gr an ti ng th e Ch ap m an s’ Rul e 5 9( e) m ot io n a nd de nyin g M is so ur i Ba si n’s Ru le 59 (e) m ot io n.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-1 5-