Skip to main content

Raylin Richard v. Anadarko Petroleum Corporation

5th CircuitMarch 2, 2017No. 16-30216Cited 20 times
Mixed ResultOffshore Energy Services, Incorporated$1,068,695.96 awarded
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Elrod, Southwick, Graves
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Outcome

The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision to permit reformation of the master services contract between OES and Anadarko, but modified the attorney's fees award, reducing it from $468,599.90 to $168,695.96 to reflect Liberty Mutual's pro-rata share.

What This Ruling Means

**Worker Wins Contract Dispute But Attorney Fees Reduced** This case involved a dispute over a work contract between Offshore Energy Services (OES) and Anadarko Petroleum Corporation. Worker Raylin Richard was caught in the middle when questions arose about the terms of the master services contract that governed his employment situation. The court sided with the worker on the main issue, allowing the contract to be reformed (legally corrected) to reflect what the parties originally intended. However, the appeals court made one important change: it significantly reduced the attorney fees that could be recovered. The original attorney fee award of $468,599.90 was cut down to $168,695.96 because the court determined that Liberty Mutual insurance should only pay its proportional share of the legal costs. **What This Means for Workers:** This ruling shows that courts will step in to fix contracts when the written terms don't match what was actually agreed upon. However, it also demonstrates that recovering attorney fees in employment disputes can be complicated, especially when multiple parties and insurance companies are involved. Workers should understand that even when they win their case, the final amount they receive might be adjusted based on various legal factors.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.