Oliver Communications Group, Inc. v. Schneider Electric Buildings Americas, Inc.
Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo) | 2018
What This Case Means for Subcontractors
Oliver Communications was a subcontractor to Schneider Electric on a bridge security camera project. When an Oliver employee was injured on site, the property owner demanded indemnification from Schneider, who then demanded it from Oliver. The court ruled Oliver did not have to pay because the injury was caused solely by the property owner's negligence, not Oliver's work. This protects subcontractors from indemnifying clients for injuries the client caused themselves.
Key Takeaways
- •Indemnity clauses don't require you to cover the other party's sole negligence—even if the contract language is broad. Courts will limit indemnity obligations to your own negligence.
- •Don't automatically pay indemnity demands without reviewing who actually caused the injury. If the client/general contractor was solely at fault, you likely don't owe anything.
- •Broad indemnity language in subcontracts flows down from prime contracts, but that doesn't expand your actual liability beyond what the law allows.
Oliver did not agree to indemnify for sole negligence of indemnitee.
Frequently Asked Question
Do I have to indemnify my general contractor if their employee gets hurt due to their own carelessness?
No. Even if your subcontract has broad indemnity language, Texas courts won't enforce it for injuries caused solely by the other party's negligence. You only indemnify for injuries caused by your own negligence or actions. Always investigate who was actually at fault before paying any indemnity claim.
Related Cases
Gall v. United States
Appellate courts must review all sentences under an abuse-of-discretion standard regardless of whether they fall inside or outside the Guidelines range, and cannot require extraordinary circumstances to justify sentences outside the range.
Piotrowski v. City of Houston
Municipal liability under § 1983 requires proof of official policy as the moving force; isolated employee misconduct insufficient, and equal protection claim time-barred.
Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Pena
Federal race-based classifications must be analyzed under strict scrutiny regardless of whether they benefit or burden minorities, and the Fifth Amendment's equal protection obligation equals the Fourteenth Amendment's.
Northeastern Florida Chapter of the Associated General Contractors of America v. City of Jacksonville
An association of contractors has standing to challenge a minority set-aside ordinance without proving any member would have won a contract absent the ordinance; the injury is denial of equal competitive opportunity, not loss of a specific contract.
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.
In Re Kellogg Brown & Root, Inc.
The Civil Commitment of Sexually Violent Predators Act is civil, not criminal, and does not violate due process even when applied to incompetent defendants.