On August 10, 2026, in a personal injury action brought against Louisiana plant owners Methanex USA, LLC and Methanex Louisiana, LLC (“Methanex”), the United States Fifth Circuit affirmed the Middle District of Louisiana’s rulings: (1) granting Methanex’s Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss plaintiff’s intentional tort claim, with prejudice, and (2) granting Methanex’s summary judgment motion to dismiss plaintiff’s remaining tort claims with prejudice based on the statutory employer doctrine.
The Fifth Circuit confirmed that conclusory, unsafe workplace allegations do not meet the Rule 12(b)(6) pleading standard to state an intentional tort claim under Louisiana law. Addressing the plaintiff’s request for discovery, the Court reaffirmed that “well-settled federal pleading requirements do not countenance” perseveration of a case “on the possibility that he might later discover the factual support necessary for his claim.” (emphasis in original).
The Fifth Circuit further affirmed the district court’s application of the statutory employer doctrine to dismiss the plaintiff’s remaining tort claims. The Fifth Circuit found that where (1) the contract between Methanex and the plaintiff’s employer provided Methanex statutory employer status, and (2) the plaintiff was performing work in connection with a maintenance turnaround, which courts have historically recognized as integral to a plant’s operations, the district court made the “correct observation that the requirements of the statutory employment doctrine are clear from the face of the parties’ contract and our case law.” The Fifth Circuit also rejected the plaintiff’s request for discovery under Rule 56(d), finding that the plaintiff failed to identify what relevant evidence he was missing in the face of a clear application of the statutory employment doctrine.
Kathryn Gonski and Melanie Derefinko represented Methanex in the trial court and on appeal. A copy of the Fifth Circuit’s decision can be found here.