Court Opinion

ID: 9458014
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 20:40:45.760039+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:35:36.636693
License: Public Domain

LEWIS, Chief Judge
(dissenting).
Unlike my Brothers I have no difficulty in interpreting the contract language we here consider as expressing in clear and unequivocal language an intent to indemnify under the facts of this case. Indeed, I would have difficulty in conceiving how a valid claim of this nature could arise against the owner of a pole except through the sole negligence of the owner. See Rice v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 2 Cir., 202 F.2d 861, 862. Nor do I see why courts should look with disfavor upon mutual contracts of indemnity entered into for cooperative and mutual interests. The harshness of an unilateral contract of indemnity does not exist in mutual contracts and certainly not in the case at bar.