Evans v. Howard R. Green Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that question of architect’s right to indemnity against the contractor “was a matter of construction and clearly one which should have been decided by the court and not submitted to the jury”
• noting that such clauses must “plainly manifest ] an intention, not to be limited to future losses or liabilities, but also to cover past transactions and existing losses or liabilities” (quoting 42 C.J.S. Indemnity § 12(b), p. 581)
• noting that such clauses must “plainly manifest[] an intention, not to be limited to future losses or liabilities, but also to cover past transactions and existing losses or liabilities” (quoting 42 C.J.S. Indemnity § 12(b), p. 581)
• stating that under Iowa common law it was “generally improper for the subject of liability insurance to be raised in any way before the jury,” but concluding the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying motion for mistrial
• broad and all-inclusive language is generally insufficient to show intent to indemnify for an indemnitee’s own negligence
• agreement to indemnify one for the consequences of one’s own negligence “must be clear and unequivocally expressed.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).