Myers v. Texaco Refining & Marketing, Inc.
422 S.E.2d 216 | Court of Appeals of Georgia | 1992
What This Case Means for Subcontractors
A service station operator (Myers) agreed to indemnify the owner (Texaco) for injury claims except those caused solely by Texaco's negligence. When a customer was injured and both parties were found partially at fault, Texaco demanded Myers cover its share of the damages under the indemnity clause. The Georgia Court of Appeals ruled the clause was enforceable and required Myers to indemnify Texaco even for Texaco's partial negligence, as long as it wasn't Texaco's sole fault. This means broad indemnity clauses that exclude only "sole negligence" will be enforced to cover shared liability situations.
Key Takeaways
- •Indemnity clauses excluding only the owner's "sole negligence" are enforceable and will require you to cover the owner's share of damages in joint negligence situations.
- •Review your contract language carefully—if it says you indemnify for claims except "sole negligence," you're likely covering the owner's partial fault too.
- •Make sure your insurance policy covers indemnification obligations, especially for the owner's negligence, or you could face uninsured liability exposure.
Myers indemnifies Texaco for each and every claim except those arising from Texaco's sole negligence.
Frequently Asked Question
If my contract says I'll indemnify the owner except for their sole negligence, am I really covering their partial fault?
Yes. Georgia courts enforce this language to mean you indemnify the owner even when they're partially negligent, as long as they're not 100% at fault. The "sole negligence" exception is narrow. Make sure your insurance covers indemnification for the owner's negligence, or negotiate the clause to exclude the owner's negligence entirely.
Related Cases
Fitzgerald v. Advanced Spine Fixation Systems, Inc.
A manufacturer must indemnify an innocent seller for products liability litigation costs under Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code § 82.002(a), even if the seller did not sell the particular defective product that injured the plaintiff, provided the seller qualifies as a 'seller' under the statute.
Associated Indemnity Corp. v. CAT Contracting, Inc.
A surety does not owe a common law duty of good faith to its principal, but good faith is a contractual condition precedent to indemnification, requiring proof of improper motive or willful ignorance rather than mere negligence.
Entergy Gulf States, Inc. v. Summers
A premises owner that contracts for work performance and provides workers' compensation insurance to contractors' employees qualifies as a statutory employer entitled to the exclusive remedy defense under the Texas Workers' Compensation Act.
Lee Lewis Construction, Inc. v. Harrison
A general contractor owes a duty of care to a subcontractor's employee for fall protection when it retains actual control over safety measures, and the evidence sufficiently supported findings of negligence and gross negligence.
Rory v. Continental Insurance
Unambiguous contractual limitations periods in insurance policies must be enforced as written unless they violate law or public policy; judicial assessments of reasonableness cannot override clear contract terms.
Gould Electronics Inc., F/k/a Gould Inc. American Premier Underwriters, Inc. v. United States of America Gould Electronics Inc. American Premier Underwriters, Inc.
Under the FTCA, Ohio law governs the jurisdictional inquiry for contribution and indemnity claims arising from a toxic tort settlement, and the United States would be liable for contribution but not indemnity under Ohio law.