Emergency Professionals of Atlanta, P.C. v. Watson

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• affirming a grant of summary judgment to third-party defendants when the defaulting defendant now seeking contribution and indemnity “had a defense available to it which would have defeated the [original] action but failed to assert that defense”
• “no indemnity claim exists where party seeking indemnity was not legally obligated to make the payment”
• “unless a contract for indemnification explicitly and expressly states that the negligence of the indemnitee is covered, this Court will not interpret such an agreement as a promise to save the indemnitee from his own negligence”
• “unless a contract for indemnification explicitly and expressly states that the negligence of the indemnitee is covered, this Court will not interpret such an agreement as a promise to save the indemnitee from his own negligence”
• “[U]nless a contract for indemnification explicitly and expressly states that the negligence of the indemnitee is covered, this Court will not interpret such an agreement as a promise to save the indemnitee from his own negligence.”
• “[N]o indemnification or contribution can be recovered by the alleged tortfeasor from a third party if the alleged tortfeasor had a defense available which would have defeated the action but failed to assert it.” (emphasis added)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).