Goldman

Goldman v. Ecco-Phoenix Electric Corp.

Good Law
1964 Cal. LEXIS 153·41 Cal. Rptr. 73·62 Cal. 2d 40·396 P.2d 377
Supreme Court of CaliforniaNovember 9, 1964S. F. No. 21291California3,339 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Tobriner, J.

We adjudicate here defendant corporation’s appeal from a declaratory judgment decreeing that it is contractually bound to indemnify plaintiffs against liability for personal injuries suffered by one of defendant’s employees. We hold that one who seeks indemnification from his own negligence must draft the instrument in specific, precise and unambiguous terms; the imposition of such an obligation cannot rest upon language which is as loose and obscure as that of the instant contract. Accordingly, plaintiffs cannot obtain indemnification in this case if their negligence contributed to the injury. Since the trial court rendered no findings on the issue of fault, we reverse the judgment and remand it for findings on the issues of the relation of plaintiffs’ negligence, if any, and defendant’s negligence, if any, to the employee’s injuries.

Plaintiffs Goldman and Staggers (hereinafter Clovis), who operated as general contractors under the name of Clovis Construction Company, contracted with the City and County of San Francisco to build a firehouse. Defendant EccoPhoenix Electric Corporation (hereinafter Ecco) subcontracted with Clovis to do all the electrical work in the construction…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.