Court Opinion

ID: 9933348
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-09 18:41:55.115712+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:02:48.797359
License: Public Domain

I respectfully dissent. The underlying litigation brought by the estate of Larry Franks concerned an alleged design defect, i.e., that the front-end loader had been designed without an emergency/parking brake system. I believe that the indemnity agreement, as a matter of law, requires Harsco to indemnify Navistar. I disagree with the majority's implication that Navistar should bear the full responsibility of the design
defect because it failed to equip the front-end loaders with the emergency/parking brakes, when clearly the front-end loader had been defectively designed by Harsco and was received by Navistar's predecessor, International, in that defective condition.