Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Doster Construction Co. v. Marathon Electrical Contractors, Inc.

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided September 25, 2009No. 1061471Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partMurdock, Justice

I concur in the Court’s affirmance of the trial court’s summary judgment in favor of Marathon Electrical Contractors, Inc., concerning the claims against it by Doster Construction Company, Inc., alleging that Marathon breached its contract with Dost-er by faffing to procure insurance for a cross-claim asserted against Doster by Steel City, Inc. I disagree, however, with the Court’s conclusion that Marathon breached its contract with Doster when it failed to indemnify Doster for Steel City’s claim against Doster.

Contracts “ ‘are construed so as to give effect to the intention of the parties,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Industrial Tile, Inc. v. StewartSupreme Court of Alabama · 1980
  2. Celtic Life Ins. Co. v. McLendonSupreme Court of Alabama · 2001
  3. Pyle v. PizitzSupreme Court of Alabama · 1926
  4. Harsco Corp. v. NAVISTAR INTERN. TRANSP.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1993

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API