Legal Opinion
Bjorkman v. Suffolk Construction Co.
Massachusetts Appeals Court
Decided May 12, 1997No. 95-P-2043PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJacobs, J.
Once again we are asked to interpret a contractual indemnification clause under G. L. c. 149, § 29C. The plaintiff, an employee of L.D. Russo, Inc. (Russo), was injured in 1990 at a construction site in New Braintree where Suffolk Construction Company, Inc. (Suffolk), was the general contractor under a contract with the Commonwealth. The plaintiff filed suit against Suffolk and Suffolk impleaded Russo, claiming a right to indemnification under a subcontract. A Superior Court judge, responding to motions for summary judgment and declaratory judgment, declared the indemnity clause void. Suffolk…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Royal Indemnity Co. v. BlakelyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1977
- Herson v. New Boston Garden Corp.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1996
- Transamerica Insurance Group v. Turner Construction Co.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1992
- Harnois v. QUANNAPOWITT DEVELOPMENT, INC.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1993
- Callahan v. A. J. Welch Equipment Corp.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1994
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Berman v. LinnaneMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2001
- Lally v. Volkswagen AktiengesellschaftMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1998
- Northrup v. BrighamMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2005
- Brown v. Koch Membrane Systems, Inc.Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 2001
- Level 3 Communications, LLC v. MCI WorldCom, Inc.Massachusetts Superior Court · 2001
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.