Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Petroleum Personnel, Inc.
Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SEERDEN, Justice.
Atlantic Richfield Co. (ARCO), the defendant in a suit brought by Keith W. Chemiack, brought in Petroleum Personnel, Inc. (PPI), Cherniack’s employer, as a third-party defendant, alleging that PPI indemnified ARCO by contract. Both PPI and ARCO moved for summary judgment. The trial court severed the action against PPI, granted PPI’s motion, and denied ARCO’s motion. ARCO raises three points of error. We affirm.
The parties argue whether the indemnity provision in the ARCO/PPI contract satisfies the express negligence doctrine, whether ARCO’s third-party complaint…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Ethyl Corp. v. Daniel Construction Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1987
- Castleberry v. Goolsby Building Corp.Texas Supreme Court · 1981
- Rodriguez v. YenawineCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1977
- Caterpillar Tractor Co. v. Boyett, Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District1984
- B-F-W Construction Co. v. GarzaCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1988
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Petroleum Personnel, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1989
- Continental Steel Co. v. H.A. Lott, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)1989
- Houston Lighting & Power Co. v. Wheelabrator Coal Services Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1990
- Continental Steel Co. v. H.A. Lott, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)1989