         IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

                  FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

                   _____________________

                        No. 00-30352
                      Summary Calendar
                   _____________________


MURPHY G. RICHARD,

                                     Plaintiff,

                          versus

SOUTHWESTERN OFFSHORE CORP.,

                                     Defendant-Cross-Defendant-
                                     Third Party Plaintiff-Appellant,

ISLAND OPERATING CO., INC.,

                                     Third Party Defendant-
                                     Cross Claimant-Appellee,

COMMERCIAL UNION ASSURANCE CO., PLC;
YORKSHIRE INSURANCE CO., LTD.; PHOENIX
ASSURANCE PUBLIC LTD. CO.; SKANDIA
MARINE INSURANCE CO., (U.K.), LTD.; TERRA
NOVA INSURANCE CO., LTD.; THREADNEEDLE
INSURANCE CO., LTD.; ASSURANCE GENERALES
DE FRANCE INCENDIE ACCIDENTS REASSURANCES
TRANSPORT,

                                     Third Party Defendants-
                                     Appellees.
           _______________________________________________________

                   Appeal from the United States District Court for
                          the Western District of Louisiana
                              (USDC No. 98-CV-951)
           _______________________________________________________
                                September 25, 2000

Before REAVLEY, DeMOSS and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

       The appeal of Southwestern Offshore Corporation argues solely a maritime

obligation of Island Operating Company under § 905(c) of the Longshore and

Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act, 33 U.S.C. § 905(c), and its contract with

Pennzoil Exploration & Production Company. We agree with the district court’s

holding that the contract is a non-maritime contract and that the decision is

controlled by Hodgen v. Forest Oil Corp., 87 F.3d 1512, 1526–29 (5th Cir. 1996).

       AFFIRMED.




       *
        Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be
published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R.
47.5.4.
