Schnabel Lumber Co. v. State

The state argues, and this court agrees, that “loss” as used in the indemnity clause is equated with “the amount of money actually paid by the state in settlement of the claim.” Since I believe this interpretation ignores the plain language of the indemnity clause, I dissent.

As it applies to this case, the indemnity clause reads:

The Purchaser [Schnabel Lumber Company] shall indemnify the state and hold it harmless for any and all claims, demands, suits, loss, liability and expense, for ... damage to or loss of property ... except for damages [to property], or loss [of property] proximately…