Legal Opinion
Norfolk & Western Railway Co. v. Hardinger Transfer Co.
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Decided March 29, 1976No. Civ. A. 74-65 EriePublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
KNOX, District Judge.
The instant case involves the predictable perplexing problems which arise when two well-recognized legal principles come into collision. These are the well known rules of interpretation of contracts: (1) that a contract of indemnity will not be construed to indemnify the indemnitee against his own acts of negligence unless such indemnity is clearly and specifically provided for; and (2) that all words of a contract must, if possible, be given effect!
The defendant Hardinger Transfer Company (Hardinger) contracted with the plaintiff Norfolk & Western Railway Company…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- United States v. SeckingerSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Perry v. PayneSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1907
- Dilks v. Flohr ChevroletSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
- Harry G. Seaboldt v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company (Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff) v. Thompson Mahogany Company (Third-Party Defendant)Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1961
- Westinghouse Electric Co. v. Murphy, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1967
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Lincoln Pulp & Paper Co., Inc. v. Dravo Corp.District Court, D. Maine · 1977
- Commercial Union Assurance Co. v. Brown Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1980
- Furlon v. Haystack Mountain Ski Area, Inc.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1978
- DiPietro v. City of PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
- McConney v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1978
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.