Kirby Shealy III and W. Taylor Stanley | Adams and Reese Click here to read the S.C. Court of Appeals decision South Carolina contractors need to be aware of a recent decision by the South Carolina Court of Appeals that clarifies the landscape for indemnity provisions in contracts and introduces critical consideration regarding the application… Continue reading South Carolina Ruling Has Major Implications on Indemnity Provisions and Collateral Estoppel
Tag: Indemnity Provision
More Fun with Indemnity and Construction Contracts!
Christopher G. Hill | Construction Law Musings Well, I’m back. It’s been quite a while since my last post due to some busy family times and running my law practice. Hopefully, you will hear from me more often in the future. Now. . . on with the post: I have often discussed indemnity provisions here… Continue reading More Fun with Indemnity and Construction Contracts!
Understand Agreements in Hold Harmless and Indemnity Provisions
Jeffrey Cavignac | Construction Executive One of the most important provisions in a construction contract is the indemnity provision. An indemnity provision, which usually includes a requirement to hold harmless and defend another party, is included in nearly all construction contracts. Generally speaking, the upstream party (a general contractor or owner, for example) is attempting… Continue reading Understand Agreements in Hold Harmless and Indemnity Provisions
Indemnity Provision Prevails Over “Other Insurance” Clause
Tred R. Eyerly | Insurance Law Hawaii The Second Circuit predicted that the New York appellate courts would find the contractual indemnity provision prevailed over the application of an “other insurance” provisions. Cent. Sur. Co. v. Metro. Transit Auth., 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 29860 (2nd Cir. Oct. 5,2021). Long Island Railroad (LIRR)… Continue reading Indemnity Provision Prevails Over “Other Insurance” Clause
Insurance Policies and Indemnity Provisions Are Not the Same
Garret Murai | California Construction Law Blog Just because you own a pair of Air Jordans doesn’t make you Michael Jordan. In the next case, Carter v. Pulte Home Corporation, Case No. A154757 (July 23, 2020), the 1st District Court of Appeal denied an insurance carrier’s equitable subrogation claim explaining that an insurer’s obligations under its… Continue reading Insurance Policies and Indemnity Provisions Are Not the Same