Legal Opinion
Young v. Mobil Oil Corp.
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Decided April 22, 1987No. A8203-01737; CA A36144PublishedCited by 23 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWarden, P. J.
The only issue presented by this appeal 1 is whether third-party defendant Myers Drum Company (Myers) has a contractual duty to indemnify defendant/third-party plaintiff Mobil Oil Corporation (Mobil) for a payment made to plaintiffs in settlement of their claims against Mobil. 2 The trial court held that the indemnity provision in Myers’ contract with Mobil is void. We affirm.
The facts are not disputed. Mobil is a New York corporation with headquarters in that state, and Myers, until 1985, was a subsidiary of a California corporation. On November 1, 1979, Mobil entered into a contract with…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Loucks v. . Standard Oil Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1918
- A. S. Rampell, Inc. v. Hyster Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1957
- Haag v. BarnesNew York Court of Appeals · 1961
- Harrell v. Travelers Indemnity Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1977
- Business Incentives Co., Inc. v. Sony Corp. of Amer.District Court, S.D. New York · 1975
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Chrysler Corp. v. Skyline Industrial Services, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1995
- Fiedler v. BowlerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992
- MacHado-miller v. Mersereau & Shannon, LLPCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2002
- Capital One Bank v. FortCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
- CACV OF COLORADO, LLC v. StevensCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2012
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.