Background
Three Aeropres employees were transferring propane at a Cotton Valley facility when a hose connection failed, releasing propane that ignited. George Hardaway and Daniel Payne were severely burned; Chancey Hawk later died. The facility was owned by XTO Energy and operated by Aeropres, which used its own employees, trucks, and equipment.
The workers and their families sued Aeropres and later added XTO, alleging that the facility’s weather shed/loading rack was defective, trapped vapors and heat, and worsened the injuries. They also asserted that XTO was liable for leasing and profiting from a dangerous facility and for failing to provide a safe workplace.
The Court’s Holding
The court granted XTO’s writ application, reversed the denial of summary judgment, and dismissed the remaining claims against XTO with prejudice. The record did not support a finding that XTO had custody or operational control of Aeropres’ propane-transfer operations, or an obligation to inspect, alter, or ensure regulatory compliance at the facility.
Nor did the plaintiffs produce evidence that XTO knew or should have known of an apparent dangerous defect in the shed. The court found that the shed complied with the applicable NFPA provisions, no prior incidents or complaints identified it as dangerous, and OSHA’s inspections cited Aeropres for hose and coupling violations—not the shed or XTO. The court also held that profit from a lease does not itself create a legal duty and that the duty to provide a safe workplace belonged to Aeropres as employer.
Key Takeaways
- A premises-liability plaintiff must show an unreasonably dangerous defect and the owner’s actual or constructive knowledge of it.
- An owner’s limited inspection access for pipeline maintenance did not establish custody or control of a tenant’s operations.
- Absent evidence of an apparent defect or notice, expert disagreement alone did not defeat summary judgment.
Why It Matters
The decision limits premises-liability exposure for a property owner where an independent tenant controls the hazardous operation and the record does not show notice of a dangerous structural defect. It also distinguishes an owner’s financial interest in a lease from a legally actionable duty to injured workers.