Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: contract of indemnity contract Sorted by: old Court: us supreme court Year: 1983 Page 1 of about 89 results (0.059 seconds)

Feb 23 1983 (FN)

Lockheed Aircraft Corp Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Feb-23-1983

..... emergency, and the air national guard pilot was permanently injured. the pilot sued stencel, the manufacturer of the ejection system, for negligence. stencel cross-claimed against the united states for indemnity. its claim, like lockheed's claim in this case, was that it was, at most, passively negligent, while the government's active negligence caused the injuries. both claims ..... "relied on the existence of a contractual relationship between the [third-party] shipowner and the employer." ante at 350 u. s. 196 . the holding of ryan is that a contract that provides for employer liability, like the divided damages rule, is a sufficiently compelling basis of liability to overcome the limitation of liability principle. [ footnote 2/3 ] the parties seek ..... no underlying tort liability on the government's part toward the employee, there was no basis for indemnification. we note that the decision whether or not to allow third-party indemnity actions is a problem common to all workers' compensation systems. professor larson has described this issue as "[p]erhaps the most evenly balanced controversy in all of workers' ..... any other person otherwise entitled to recover damages from the united states . . . because of the injury or death. . . ." the district court, concluding that 8116(c) did not bar the indemnity claim, granted summary judgment for lockheed. on appeal, the united states court of appeals for the district of columbia circuit reversed. thomas v. lockheed aircraft corp., 215 u.s.app .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 23 1983 (FN)

Cone Mem. Hosp. Vs. Mercury Constr. Corp.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Feb-23-1983

..... seeking a declaratory judgment that there was no right to arbitration, that petitioner was not liable to respondent, and that, if it was liable it would be entitled to indemnity from the architect. a few days later, petitioner obtained an ex parte injunction from the state court forbidding respondent to take any steps toward arbitration, but when respondent objected ..... not contest the existence of this agreement, although it asserts that the architect lacked authority to agree to a delay in presentation of claims or to entertain claims after the contract work was completed. in january, 1980, mercury submitted to the architect its claims for delay and impact costs. mercury and the architect discussed the claims over several months ..... award rendered by the arbitrators shall be final, and judgment may be entered upon it in accordance with applicable law in any court having jurisdiction thereof." app. 29-30. the contract also specified the time limits for arbitration demands. [ footnote 2 ] construction on the project began in july, 1975. performance was to be completed by october, 1979. [ footnote 3 ..... and oversee the construction project. disputes decided by the architect or not decided within a specified time could be submitted to binding arbitration under an arbitration clause in the contract. subsequently, during construction, respondent submitted claims to the architect for extended overhead or increase in construction costs due to petitioner's delay or inaction. but the claims were .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 22 1983 (SC)

N.R. Srinivasa Iyer Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Madras and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jul-22-1983

Reported in : AIR1983SC899; [1983]54CompCas711(SC); (1983)2CompLJ309(SC); 1983(2)SCALE44; (1983)3SCC458; [1983]3SCR479

..... bailee of the motor car in question.13. the first condition which is the usual condition in such a n contract is that the contract of insurance is a contract of indemnity and the insurer undertake to indemnify the insurer against loss of or damage to the motor car and/or its ..... goods are discharged from the vessel, they shall be at their own risk and expense; such discharge shall constitute complete delivery and performance under this contract and the shipowners shall be freed from any further responsibility'. the defendants unloaded the two cases from the vessel. when the plaintiff sought to take ..... amount which was settled as the charges for carrying out all the repairers. at this stage high court overlooked another important condition of the contract of insurance which has been extracted hereinabove. the insurer may at its own option either can repair, reinstate or replace the motor car, ..... when the plaintiff's son soon after the accident took the damaged car to the nearest repairer, the plaintiff was discharging an obligation under the contract of insurance, for and on behalf of the insured because he could have legitimately claimed the cost of removal not exceeding rs. 150 from ..... would under similar circumstances take of his property of the same quality and value as the motor car bailed. this last submission alleging a contract of bailment is seriously disputed by the respondent-insurance company.3. the insurer contested the claim, inter alia, contending that the suit is not .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 16 1983 (SC)

Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. Vs. State of Karnataka

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Dec-16-1983

Reported in : AIR1984SC744; (1984)1CompLJ157(SC); 1983(2)SCALE1090; (1984)1SCC706; [1984]2SCR248; [1984]55STC314(SC); 1984(16)LC789(SC); AIR1984SCC744

..... present transaction, for the manufacture and supply of railway coaches, and the indemnity bond in respect of the contract. it was held by this court that the answer to the question whether a contract is a works contract or a contract of sale depends upon the construction of the terms of the contract in the light of surrounding circumstances. it was held that when all the ..... inflexible rule applicable alike to all transactions. these did not give any magic formula by the application of which one could say in every case whether a contract was a contract for sale or a contract for work and labour these merely focused on one or the other aspect of the transaction and afforded some guidance in determining the question, but basically and ..... mentioned in clause 6 of the agreement. the other incidental provisions of clause 6 are not relevant for the controversy in question. clause 7 of the 1951 agreement dealt with indemnity for loss or damage which is not relevant for our purposes. clause 8 dealt with light to cancel the agreement, clauses 9 and 10 provided for 'inspection'. clause 11 prohibited ..... that whether the wheelsets and underframes were supplied free of cost or not made no essential difference. the material and wage escalator and adjustments regarding final price mentioned in the contract were neutral factors. the facts which should be emphasised in transactions in question with which we are concerned, that the transactions related to the entrustment of the maintenance of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 11 1983 (FN)

Director, Owcp Vs. Perini North River Assocs.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-11-1983

..... purposes involved the elimination of a strict liability unseaworthiness remedy against a vessel owner afforded to longshoremen by seas shipping co. v. sieracki, 328 u. s. 85 (1946), and an indemnity claim against the stevedore by the vessel owner afforded by ryan page 459 u. s. 322 stevedoring co. v. pan-atlantic s.s. corp., 350 u. s. 124 (1956). ..... (brandeis, j., dissenting). [ footnote 2/15 ] in explaining why the holding in rohde was consistent with jensen and subsequent cases, the court stated: "in each of them, the employment or contract was maritime in nature, and the rights and liabilities of the parties were prescribed by general rules of maritime law essential to its proper harmony and uniformity. here, the parties ..... 1972 legislative history. [ footnote 2/13 ] the court reasoned: "the work of a stevedore in which the deceased was engaging is maritime in its nature; his employment was a maritime contract; the injuries which he received were likewise maritime; and the rights and liabilities of the parties in connection therewith were matters clearly within the admiralty jurisdiction." "if new york can ..... page 459 u. s. 300 coverage under the amended lhwca. accordingly, we reverse the decision below. i the facts are not in dispute. respondent perini north river associates (perini) contracted to build the foundation of a sewage treatment plant that extends approximately 700 feet over the hudson river between 136th and 145th streets in manhattan. the project required that perini .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 11 1983 (FN)

Bowen Vs. Usps

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-11-1983

..... ) (employee may present grievances to his employer "without the intervention of the bargaining representative, as long as the adjustment is not inconsistent with the terms of a collective bargaining contract or agreement then in effect . . ."). most collective bargaining agreements, however, contain exclusive grievance-arbitration procedures and give the union power to supervise the procedure. see feller, supra ..... made no attempt to exhaust the grievance procedure, it was necessary for the court to consider only the union's interest in participating in the administration of the contract and the employer's interest in limiting administrative remedies. the court noted, however, that, if "the union refuses to press or only perfunctorily presses the individual' ..... difficulty with this argument is that it treats the relationship between the employer and employee, created by the collective bargaining agreement, as if it were a simple contract of hire governed by traditional common law principles. this reading of vaca fails to recognize that a collective bargaining agreement is much more than traditional common law employment ..... for damages resulting from a wrongful discharge treats the relationship between the employer and employee, created by the collective bargaining agreement, as if it were a simple contract of hire governed by traditional common law principles. such a reading fails to recognize that a collective bargaining agreement is much more than traditional common law employment .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 18 1983 (FN)

Shepard Vs. Nlrb

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-18-1983

..... . shortly thereafter, kissinger's manager was informed by penhall's superintendent that the union had said that kissinger should be replaced because it was referring nonunion operators. kissinger lost the contract with penhall, and subsequently signed the 1977 agreement. 249 n.l.r.b. at 390. [ footnote 2/2 ] the recommended order, which was omitted from publication, would have required ..... employer, or to cease doing business with any other person, and any contract or agreement entered into . . . containing such an agreement shall be to such extent unenforcible [ sic ] and void. . . ." 73 stat. 543. [ footnote 2 ] section 8(b)(4), as set ..... is therefore affirmed. [ footnote 1 ] section 8(e) provides in pertinent part: "it shall be an unfair labor practice for any labor organization and any employer to enter into any contract or agreement . . . whereby such employer ceases or refrains or agrees to cease or refrain from handling, using, selling, transporting or otherwise dealing in any of the products of any ..... charges with the national labor relations board, claiming that the agreement violated, inter alia, 8(e) of the national labor relations act (act), which prohibits so-called "hot cargo" contracts. an administrative law judge held that the union and the contractors had violated 8(e) by agreeing not to do business with nonunion owner-operators of dump trucks, and recommended .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 19 1983 (FN)

Missouri Vs. Hunter

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-19-1983

missouri v. hunter - 459 u.s. 359 (1983) u.s. supreme court missouri v. hunter, 459 u.s. 359 (1983) missouri v. hunter no. 81-1214 argued november 10, 1982 decided january 19, 1983 459 u.s. 359 certiorari to the court of appeals of missouri, western district syllabus a missouri statute provides that any person who commits any felony under the laws of the state through the use of a dangerous or deadly weapon is also guilty of the crime of armed criminal action punishable by imprisonment for not less than three years, which punishment shall be in addition to any punishment provided by law for the felony. another missouri statute provides that any person convicted of the felony of first-degree robbery by means of a dangerous and deadly weapon shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than five years. respondent, as the result of a robbery of a supermarket in which he used a revolver, was convicted in a missouri state court of both first-degree robbery and armed criminal action, and, pursuant to the statutes, was sentenced to concurrent prison terms of 10 years for robbery and 15 years for armed criminal action. the missouri court of appeals reversed respondent's conviction and sentence for armed criminal action on the ground that his sentence for both robbery and armed criminal action violated the protection against multiple punishments for the same offense provided by the double jeopardy clause of the fifth amendment as made applicable to the states by the fourteenth .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 24 1983 (FN)

Energy Reserves Group Vs. Kansas P. and L. Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-24-1983

..... is a governmental price escalator clause; this provides that, if a governmental authority fixes a price for any natural gas that is higher than the price specified in the contract, the contract price shall be increased to that level. [ footnote 1 ] the second is a price redetermination page 459 u. s. 404 clause; this gives erg the option ..... relevant present and future state and federal law. [ footnote 22 ] this latter provision could be interpreted to incorporate all future state price regulation, and thus dispose of the contract clause claim. regardless of whether this interpretation is correct, [ footnote 23 ] the provision does suggest that erg knew its contractual rights were subject to alteration by state price regulation ..... consistent with anticipated regulated increases in the value of appellant's gas, not page 459 u. s. 402 that appellant expected to receive deregulated prices. moreover, the contract provision making any contractual term subject to relevant present and future state and federal law suggests that appellant knew its contractual rights were subject to alteration by state price regulation ..... is found, the state, in justification, must have a significant and legitimate public purpose behind the regulation. once such a purpose has been identified, the adjustment of the contracting parties' rights and responsibilities must be based upon reasonable conditions, and must be of a character appropriate to the public purpose justifying the legislation's adoption. pp. 459 u .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 24 1983 (FN)

Herman and Maclean and Huddleston

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-24-1983

herman & maclean & huddleston - 459 u.s. 375 (1983) u.s. supreme court herman & maclean & huddleston, 459 u.s. 375 (1983) herman & maclean & huddleston no. 81-680 argued november 9, 1982 decided january 24, 1983 * 459 u.s. 375 certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the fifth circuit syllabus alleging that they were defrauded by misrepresentations in a registration statement and prospectus for certain securities, purchasers of such securities brought a class action in federal district court against most of the participants in the offering, seeking recovery under 10(b) of the securities exchange act of 1934 (1934 act), which makes it unlawful for "any" person to use "any" manipulative or deceptive device or contrivance in the purchase or sale of "any" security. the trial judge instructed the jury to determine whether the plaintiffs had proved their cause of action by a preponderance of the evidence, and judgment was entered on the basis of a jury verdict in plaintiffs' favor. the court of appeals held that a cause of action may be maintained under 10(b) for fraudulent misrepresentations and omissions even when, as in this case, that conduct might also be actionable under 11 of the securities act of 1933 (1933 act), which expressly allows purchasers of a registered security to sue certain enumerated parties who play a direct role in a registered offering when false or misleading information is included in a registration statement. however, the court of appeals .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //