NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT 2022 CA 0782 

### CROSSTEX ENERGY SERVICES, LP,CROSSTEX LICA LLC, AND CROSSTEX PROCESSING SERVICES, LLC VERSUS TEXAS BRINE COMPANY,ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY & AMERICAN GUARANTEE AND LIABILITY INSURANCE COMPANY Judgment Rendered:

On Appeal from the 23rd Judicial District Court In and forthe Parish ofAssumption

State ofLouisiana Trial Court Docket Number 34202 

### Hon.Thomas J. Kliebert, Jr.Judge Presiding,Ad Hoc

James M. Garner Leopold Z. Sher Peter L. Hilbert, Jr. 

### Jeffrey D. Kessler Christopher T. Chocheles Darnell Bludworth New Orleans, Louisiana

and Royce I. Duplessis New Orleans, Louisiana

and Ulysses Gene Thibodeaux Lake Charles, Louisiana

and Travis J. Turner Gonzales, Louisiana

and 

### Robert Ryland Percy, III Gonzales, Louisiana


### e\ 

### He5f") : 5, 

## FEB 17 2023

Counsel forAppellant/ 

### Third - Party Plaintiff, 

### Texas Brine Company,L.L.C.

## Roy C. Cheatwood

Kent A. Lambert Colleen C. Jarrott Adam B. Zuckerman Matthew C. Juneau Leopoldo J. Yanez Lauren BrinkAdams New Orleans, Louisiana Counsel forAppellee/ 

### Third - Party Defendant, Legacy Vulcan, LLC

BEFORE: HOLDRIDGE, PENZATO, AND HESTER, JJ.

2PENZATO, J.



## This dispute is one of many arising out of the August 2012 sinkhole that appeared near Bayou Come in Assumption Parish. In this appeal, Texas Brine 

### Company, 

### LLC challenges a January 18, 2022 judgment that granted Legacy Vulcan, LLC' s " 

### Motion for Partial Summary Judgment Dismissing Texas Brine's Claims Under the Amended Operating Agreement" and dismissed Texas Brine's 

## claims against Legacy Vulcan under the parties' Amended Operating Agreement. After review, we dismiss the appeal and remand the matter to the trial court. The 

## motion to dismissthe appeal filed byLegacyVulcan is denied as moot. In a related appeal, 

### this court recently considered a substantially similar 

## judgment rendered by the same trial court, on the same day, in a different trial court docket number. See Pontchartrain Natural Gas System v Texas Brine 

### Company, LLC,2022-0738 (La.App. 1st Cir. 12129122), So.3d 2022 WL 17983139 ( No. 34,265, 23rd Judicial District Court, Assumption Parish). The judgment at issue in Pontchartrain, So.3d 

### 2022 WL 179831391, *2-3, also 

## granted a " Motion for Partial Summary Judgment Dismissing Texas Brine's Claims UndertheAmended Operating Agreement" filed by Legacy Vulcan and dismissed 

## Texas Brine's contract claims against Legacy Vulcan under the parties' Amended Operating Agreement. Like the judgment in Pontchartrain, So.3d 2022 WL 17983139, * 3, the judgment before us in this appeal was designated as a final judgment pursuant to La. C.C.P. art. 1915. The appeal in Pontchartrain, So.3d , 2022 WL 17983139, at * 4, was dismissed after a different panel of this court determined that subject matter jurisdiction did not exist. 

### Specifically, this court concluded that the January 18, 

## 2022 partial summary judgment did not meet the requirements of an appealable final judgment under La. C.C. P. art. 1915( B) and R.J. Messinger, Inc. v. Rosenblum, 04- 1664 ( La. 312105), 894 So.2d 1113, 1122. 

### Although Texas Brine

C

## and Legacy Vulcan entered into several interdependent contracts, the issue on



### appeal was limited to Texas Brine's claims against Legacy Vulcan for breach of the parties' Amended Operating Agreement. 

## Therefore, any decision by this court
on these limited claims, " 

### without consideration of the remaining interdependent 

## contracts and claims thereupon, would merely result in inefficient, piecemeal, and possibly conflicting resolution of only a minor part ofthe parties' related contract
claims." Pontchartrain, So.3d 2022 WL 17983139, at * 4. See La. C.C.P. art. 2053 (" 

### A doubtful provision [ in a contract] must be interpreted in light ofthe 

## nature ofthe contract, equity, usages,the conduct ofthe parties before and afterthe formation ofthe contract, and ofother contracts ofa like nature between the same
parties.") ( Emphasis added.) After a thorough review of the record in this appeal, we find no material distinctions between the judgment and issues presented in this appeal and those presented in Pontchartrain, So.3d , 2022 WL 17983139. For the reasons set forth in Pontchartrain, So.3d 12022 

## WL 17983139, we findthe January 18, 2022 judgment at issue in this appeal does not meet the requirements ofa final appealable judgment under La. C.C.P. art. 1915( B) and R.J.Messinger, Inc,, 894 So.2d at 1122. Therefore, we lack subject matterjurisdiction over this appeal. 

### We dismiss the appeal and remand the matter to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion-' 

## Considering our disposition of this matter,the motion to dismiss the appeal filed by Legacy Vulcan is denied as moot. 

## All costs ofthis appeal are assessed equally between Texas Brine Company, LLC and Legacy Vulcan, LLC. MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL DENIED AS MOOT; APPEAL DISMISSED; CASE REMANDED.



### 1 We issuethis summary disposition in accordancewith Uniform Rules— Courts ofAppeal, Rule 2- 16.2(A)(1), ( 2), ( 4), and (6). M