Opinion ID: 1990920
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: ELRAC v Ward

Text: Defendant Gladys Ward rented a car from ELRAC and signed the standard indemnification clause. While driving the rental car, Ward collided with a vehicle owned by Gus Lerner. Lerner sought damages as a result of the accident, and ELRAC settled Lerner's claim for $2,073.99. ELRAC then brought the present action seeking to collect the settlement amount from Ward under the indemnification clause. Supreme Court granted ELRAC's motion for summary judgment, holding that it was entitled to indemnification under the rental agreement. The Appellate Division affirmed, stating that because ELRAC seeks indemnification for sums it has actually paid to the third party, the policy underlying Vehicle and Traffic Law § 388 is not undercut by enforcement of the indemnification clause (266 AD2d 500, 501).