Opinion ID: 803167
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: CMT’s Duty to Indemnify

Text: Under Louisiana law, a contract will not be construed to indemnify a party for its own negligent acts “unless such an intention is expressed in unequivocal terms.” Perkins v. Rubicon, Inc., 563 So.2d 258, 259 (La. 1990). Section 8.1 of the contract between CMT and CAT 5 states: “The Sub-contractor shall save and hold Contractor . . . harmless against all suits, claims, damages and losses for injuries to persons or property arising from or caused by errors, omissions or negligent acts of the Subcontractor, . . . or its employees.” (emphasis added). The contract does not unequivocally state that CMT will indemnify CAT 5 for CAT 5’s own negligent acts. The Sprinkles’ complaint, as stated above, alleged direct 7 liability claims against CAT 5 and not vicarious liability claims. Therefore, CMT is not required to indemnify CAT 5, and we affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of CMT.