Legal Opinion
Mobil Oil Corp. v. Wellpoint Dewatering Corp.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided April 5, 1985PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Although indemnity agreements are susceptible of interpretation that they do not expire on completion of the work under the contract, they must be interpreted in light of “the language and purposes of the entire agreement, and the surrounding facts and circumstances” (Margolin v New York Life Ins. Co., 32 NY2d 149, 153). Inman v Binghamton Hous. Auth. (3 NY2d 137) is controlling on the issue before us. The personal injury action there was brought on behalf of a two-year-old child who sued his landlord, Binghamton Housing Authority, for injuries which he sustained when he fell off a rear porch…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. WesolowskiNew York Court of Appeals · 1973
- Sutton v. East River Savings BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
- Margolin v. New York Life InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1973
- Inman v. Binghamton Housing AuthorityNew York Court of Appeals · 1957
- Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. J. J. Wicks, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
3Cited by4 opinions
- Luby v. Rotterdam Square, L.P.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
- Tighe v. American Compressed Gases, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
- Williams v. 100 Church Fee Owner, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2021
- Williams v. 100 Church Fee Owner, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2021