Legal Document

397 U.S. 203 90 Supreme Court Reporter 880 25 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 224 UNITED STATES, Petitioner,v.M. O. SECKINGER, Jr., etc. Number 395. Argued Jan. 14, 1970. Decided March 9, Rehearing Denied April 6, See 1031, 1255. James van R. Springer, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. John G. Kennedy, Savannah, Ga., respondent. Mr. Justice BRENNAN delivered the opinion of Court. 1 This case concerns construction a provision common to fixed-price government contracts that states private contractor 'shall be responsible all damages persons or property occur as result his fault negligence * *.' The Appeals Fifth Circuit held could not construed allow Government recover from suffered by on account its own negligence. 408 Federal Reporter, 2nd 146 (1969). We granted certiorari because large amount litigation this contract clause has produced1 and divergent results lower courts have reached in construing same similar provisions.2 396 815, 104, 24 67 reverse. 2 had entered into with Seckinger Company performance certain plumbing work at Marine base South Carolina. While working project, one Seckinger's employees was directed foreman assist fellow employee particular section pipe been partially constructed above street. About four five feet place where working, there an electric wire carried 2,400 volts electricity. accidentally came contact wire, thrown ground 18 below, seriously injured. 3 injured recovered benefits under Carolina's workmen's compensation law, S.C.Code Ann. §§ 72—1 72 504 (1962), then commenced suit Eastern District Carolina against Tort Claims Act, 28 Code KF62 2671—2680, theory injuries sustained proximate Government's States, relying clause, moved implead third-party defendant. motion denied addition would 'unnecessarily improperty complicate issues.'3 4 On merits, found customarily de-energized wires whenever were required dangerously near them. court therefore grossly negligent failing de-energize case. Alternatively, advise de-energized. Concluding also no way contributed injury, Judge ordered he judgment $45,000 plus costs. No appeal taken Court.4 5 Thereafter, proceeded Southern Georgia instant Seckinger. complaint alleged solely employee's injuries5 should fully indemnified which it satisfied. In second count, Seckinger, having undertaken perform obligated 'to properly safely provide workmanlike service said work.' 6 dismiss alternative grounds, first, barred prior and, second, contractual language sufficiently broad permit indemnification rejected first decision,6 but holding any recovery foreclosed substantially injury. that, 'majority rule,' indemnitee cannot absence unmistakably authorized result. Since here did unequivocally command negligence, question thought caused 'active direct negligence' more than 'slight dereliction' part whatsoever permitted States.7 7 view, renders nullity, can never liable tort Act otherwise agents. Thus, so argument goes, meaning only context both are jointly negligent.8 circumstance, sustain full burden ultimate liability produced. suggests is entitled indemnity comparative basis extent injuries. II 8 posture reaches us, historical background clause9 evidence concerning actual intention these parties respect sparsely presented. do know early 1938.10 fact merely precipitates confusion, however, until passage 1946, 401—424, 60 Statutes-at-Large 842, amended, 2671 2680, itself acts Viewed pre-Tort context, purpose totally unclear except, perhaps, exercise caution draftsmen, or, conceivably, attempt insulate agents their capacities if arguably combined produce given 9 American Stevedores, Incorporated versus Porello, 330 446, 847, 91 L.Ed. 1011 (1947), we before us involved here. There noted susceptible several different constructions, U.S., 457—458, 853, remanded ascertain clause. It does appear course action fruitful Porello clear indications further evidentiary proceedings shed light parties.11 Here, contrast, representation aid clarifying intentions parties, least tacit agreement explored thoroughly possible. circumstances, proceed directly problem. III 10 Preliminarily, agree federal law controls interpretation contract. County Allegheny, 322 174, 183, 64 908, 88 1209 (1944);12 Clearfield Trust company 318 363, 63 573, 87 838 (1943). conclusion pursuant authority conferred statute ultimately, Constitution.13 11 fashioning rule are, course, guided general principles evolved provisions such Among maxim most strongly drafter, States.14 seeks circumvent principle arguing inapplicable unless ambiguity dispute exists is, 'under reasonable practical one.' Gelco Builders & Burjay Const. 369 992, 999—1000, 177 Ct.Cl. 1025, 1035 (1966). itself, proffered two mutually inconsistent interpretations To sure, them pressed considerably enthusiasm other. Government, nevertheless, must implicitly conceded (a) without (b) 'reasonable practical.' Even view matter, therefore, necessarily room construction-against-drafter operate. 12 More specifically, firmly convinced reflects parties. principle, though variously articulated, accepted virtual unanimity among jurisdictions.15 traditional reluctance cast actions upon those who actually fault16 particularly applicable situation vast disparity bargaining power economic resources between contractors. Haskin, 395 503, 508 (C.A.10th Cir. 1968). 13 short, expects shift responsibility various contractors, mutual effect clarity face hardly say manifested formulation incorporated present contract.17 By terms clearly readily stretched encompass well.18 14 other hand, fail accord appropriate consideration 'all damages' resulted 'fault negligence.' (Emphasis added.) adopted Appeals, now urged drain significant protection indeed, tend potential circumstance attributable States. Whatever may extremely difficult believe they sought utilize reduce statutory rules contribution indemnity.19 Yet, interpreted mean limited situations it, opposed sole party. 15 Furthermore, latter situation, perfectly after not, event, charged part. tends narrow also, limits application circumstances doubt existed. process, considerable violence done plain resulting 16 A synthesis foregoing considerations leads suggestion premised negligence.20 place, consistent will indemnify any, employee. 17 Secondly, indemnitee's indicated preserved intact. event negligence; similarly, fall negligent. Finally, our adheres constructions ambiguous provision, less favorably party selected language. appropriately accorded emphasis stronger position negotiations.21 19 For reasons, reverse remand opinion.22 20 Reversed remanded. 21 MARSHALL took decision 22 STEWART, whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE DOUGLAS join, dissenting. 23 standard form uses long contained single sentence saying connection prosecution work.'1 30 years evidently understood words what rather hold losses incurs negligence.2 called 'a simple clause.' 146, 148.3 But today innocuous boilerplate turned inside out. says really promise reimburse go quite far obscure operates complete insurance policy. requires employee.' magnitude imposes well illustrated Here scope employment performing Paris Island Depot state law. sued claiming agreed, finding 'sole cause' awarding him damages. indeterminate portion contractor, agreed 'indemnify Despite intimations Court's contrary, deal 'common indemnity.'4 decides contract.5 N Dec. Immigration Nationality Decisions think attributed unconscionable inaccurate. 26 appeared eight enactment 1946. Before personal Thus absolutely reason secure right over joint tortfeasor. Yet asked drafter prescient foresee day nearly decade future, ingenious smuggle would, when arrived, onto backs nothing short incredible. 27 drafting certainly write providing expressly pass off either whole part, judicially determined require contractors harmless regard establish proration arising neither. shall share insurer nonetheless manages discover amounts agreement, cases involving, express agreements 'hold harmless' clauses.6 desirable ensures fair distribution loss damage. contract, every expect imposed That relieved exchange guarantee fault. Presumably bid project reflected expectation accidents. Now heaps unforeseen atop requirement State already imposed.7 29 If wants impose additional liabilities work, openly, bidder liability. domain author standard-form candor.8 Surely America business citizens.9 Holmes once '(m)en turn square corners Government.'10 always supposed two-way knows how wants. written 31 affirm judgment. petition certiorari, Solicitor General advised presently pending 200 suits involving clauses. Compare, e.g., Fisher 299 F.Supp. (D.C.E.D.Pa.1969), Accrocco, 297 966 (D.C.D.C.1969), with, dismissed 'with leave take time.' order appealed, imply propriety action. concluded, inter alia, pause consider effect, case, raised below except defense contention constituted absolute bar proceedings. Specifically, (1) failed request line de-energized; (2) accident occurred insulated; (3) safety insulation wires; (4) permitted, directed, subsequently close proximity (5) prevent proceeding manner dangerous res judicata left open option pursue claim later time. Appeals. record, neither accept nor reject characterization relative degrees issue authorities exhibit faultless indemnitor See, Associated Engineers, Job, 370 633, 651 (C.A.8th 1966), cert. denied, sub nom. Troy Cannon 389 823, 59, 77 (1967). appears follows: '11. PERMITS AND RESPONSIBILITY FOR WORK, ETC. 'The Contractor shall, expense obtain licenses permits work. He materials performed completion final acceptance, completed unit thereof theretofore finally accepted.' 41 Regulations 11.1, 11.3, 12.23, Article (1938). objective frustrated presented adhered 153 605 (C.A.2d 1946), namely, stevedoring although 94 952 (D.C.S.C.N.Y.1950). validity through exercising constitutional functions, consequences rights obligations titles liens create permit, questions controlled state.' 914. Congress provided extensive arrangements procurement, management, disposal property. generally 40 471—535 (1964 ed. Supp. IV). As scheme, Administrator Services regulations necessary managerial functions. § 486(c). Pursuant authority, contracts, includes subject suit, promulgated official use. 1—16.401 1—16.404, 1—16.901—23A, Bar California, Committee Continuing Education Bar, Contracts Practice 13.93 (1964). Sternberger 401 1012, 1021, 185 528, 543 (1968); Sun Shipbuilding Drydock 393 807, 816, 183 358, 372 Jones 304 94, 103 (D.C.S.D.N.Y.1969). number frequently principally damages, explicitly stated Freed Great Atlantic Pacific KF135 P2 Tea Co., 266 (C.A.6th 1968) (intention 'clear unambiguous' necessitating 'including damage negligence'); Brogdon 384 220 1967) (same); City Beaumont Graham, 441 Western 829 (Tex.1969) (indemnitor's extend negligence); Young Anaconda Brass 43 Wis.2d 36, 168 North 112 (1969) (indemnitor total act strict provides); collected Annot., 175 Law 8, 29—38 (1948). Other specifically clarity. Auto Owners Mut. Northern Ind. Pub. Serv. 414 192 (C.A.7th 1969); Gas Fuel Associates Midwest-Raleigh, Inc., 374 451 (C.A.4th 1967); Unitec Corporation Beatty Safway Scaffold 358 470 (C.A.9th 1966); Batson-Cook Industrial Steel Erectors, 257 410 (C.A.5th 1958). Several earlier declared clauses purported void contrary public Sternaman Metropolitan Life 170 N.Y. 13, 62 Northeastern N59 763, 57 L.R.A. (1902); Johnson's Administratrix Richmond D.R. 86 Va. 975, Southeastern S6 (1890). Bisso Inland Waterways Corp., 349 85, 75 629, 99 911 (1955); Otis Elevator Maryland Cas. 95 Colo. 99, 33 974 (1934). An example makes specific reference following recommendation Institute Architects: '4.18. INDEMNIFICATION '4.18.1. Owner Architect claims, expenses including attorneys' fees out Work, claim, damage, bodily sickness, disease death, injury destruction tangible (other Work itself) use therefrom, omission Contractor, Subcontractor, anyone indirectly employed whose liable, regardless whether hereunder.' AIA Document A201, Sept. 1967. decline intended include extends occasioned apparently dissenting opinion, assign talismanic significance Our approach respect, 853—854. Contract largely individualized turning used indicia parties' intention. Consequently, provides insufficiently Government. And, establishes mischaracterizes 'reimburse 503 1968); Shamrock Towing New York, 199 1926); Williams Midland Constructors, 221 400 (D.C.E.D.Ark.1963); (Tex.1969); employer's varies jurisdiction jurisdiction. statutes, employer tertfeasor severally principles, majority jurisdictions, available device redistribution tortfeasors. W. Prosser, Torts 47, 48 (3d 1964). 1956, injured, permitting some circumsta nces. Comment, Indemnity Joint Tort-Feasors—As Affected Employers Liability S.C.L.Rev. 423 (1965). Workmen's provisions, enacted However, statutes vary greatly categories employers apply, see generally, Reede, Adequacy Compensation even about two-thirds coverage voluntary employees. Larson, 67.10 When plan cover employees, rule, infrequently implied quasi-contractual theories. supra, 76.00—76.53. Whether authoritatively determined. Burns Power Light 769 (D.C.E.D.S.C.1950). comparable results. L Rural Elec. Coop. Kincaid, Ark. 450, 256 337 (1953), remand, 227 321, (1957); 1926). true favorable adopt, reasons previously stated, Appeals' decidedly 1941 letter Comptroller General, Comp.Gen. 149, relied dissent, sheds whatever problem us. commenting 'of impression' suggested cost-plus-fixed-fee seek reimbursement element costs, introduced letter, obviously responsive issues Comptroller. Moreover, type concerned. support facile assumption dissent cost-plus costs produced follows committed acts. exactly says. What 'responsible shifted bars operation constitute impermissible frustration medium objective—that contractor's States—can achieved concurrent resort analysis adopted, upon, instance, respond Because se governed need reach theory, breached warranty service. paragraph 'Permits Responsibility etc.' ante, 208 n. 9. previous reported construes today. say, today, 'totally unclear' 'would surely increased incurred With containing example—the Secretary War almost ago may, circumstances. 156—157 (1941). Under Carolina—which determines employee, 1346(b); Richards 1, 82 585, 492—the Coast Line Whetstone, 243 S.C. 61, 68—70, 132 172, 175—176. since award statute, tort. 72—121, 72—123 (1962); Adams Davison-Paxon 230 532, 545, 96 S.Ed.2d 566, 572—573. So role tortfeasor event. might 'reduce indemnity' seems wholly incorrect. bearing local give contractor. These cited 215 20. subrogated payment. 72—124 (1962). subjects Seckingers incremental risk contribution, yet-to-be-determined proportion, added E.g., Chrysler Hanover 350 652, 655; Riess Murchison, 329 635, 642; Restatement 235(e); Corbin 559 (1960). 543; 101. Rock Island, L.R. 254 141, 143, 55, 56, 65 188.

Classification Label: 7