“Expressly & Unequivocally” provides that the indemnitOR will indemnify the indemnitEE for the indemnitEE’s negligence, even the indemnitEE’s sole negligence.
Indemnitor is to indemnify the indemnitee for the indemnitee’s liability . . . however same may be caused
— regardless whether caused by or happening in connection with the equipment (if any) or the condition, maintenance, possession or use thereof
–regardless whether claims are by reason of the use of the leased property (if any)
… regardless whether it arises from the use of thee indemnitEE’s premises, facilities, or services (if any)
… regardless whether it arises in connection with the agreed upon work
… regardless of responsibility for negligence
Indemnitor is to indemnify for the indemnitee’s liabilities caused by the indemnitOR.
Does not include indemnity for liabilities that were caused by other than the indemnitOR.
Dissenting Justice Cole quotes Justice Traynor in from Thomas Drayage 69 Cal.2d 33 that words do not have constant reference.
Contends that “[r]ather than the triparite classification discerned by the majority” the proper unifying basic premise of the indemnity decisions discussed is that the intention of the parties must be enforced by limiting the indemnity to what the parties expected it to cover.
MAJORITY DECISION, STEVENS
The Second District Court of Appeal for California, in a split decision, declares that in general all contractual indemnity provisions fall within one of three classifications:
MacDonald & Kruse, Inc. v. San Jose Steel Co., 29 Cal.App.3d 413