State of New York v. Panex Industries, Inc.

Second Circuit

State of New York v. Panex Industries, Inc.

41 F. App'x 516

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedAugust 13, 2002

DocketDocket No. 02-7203

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 41 F. App'x 516 (State of New York v. Panex Industries, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State of New York v. Panex Industries, Inc., 41 F. App'x 516 (2d Cir. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

SUMMARY ORDER

UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the judgment of the district court be AFFIRMED.

Dresser-Rand Company, Dresser Industries, Inc., and Turbodyne Electric Power Corporation, appeal from the judgment of the United States District Court for the Western District of New York (Elfvin, J.), dismissing their third-party claim for indemnification against Cooper Industries, Inc., and its wholly owned subsidiary, McGraw Edison Company. We affirm for substantially the reasons stated in Judge Elfvin’s opinion. New York, et al. v. Panex Indus., Inc., et al., 94-CV-0400E(F), 2001 WL 241791 (W.D.N.Y. Mar.8, 2001).

Appellants rely here (as with the district court) on the less-than-optimal phrasings of the contract. But they offer no competing, integrated reading that favors their position. In any event, appellants as indemnitees had the burden to show that there was “a ‘clear and unmistakable intent’ to indemnify.” Commander Oil Corp. v. Advance Food Serv. Equip., 991 F.2d 49, 51 (2d Cir.1993). Quibbles, grammatical imperfections, convoluted statements, and near ambiguities are not enough.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

SUMMARY ORDER

UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the judgment of the district court be AFFIRMED.

Dresser-Rand Company, Dresser Industries, Inc., and Turbodyne Electric Power Corporation, appeal from the judgment of the United States District Court for the Western District of New York (Elfvin, J.), dismissing their third-party claim for indemnification against Cooper Industries, Inc., and its wholly owned subsidiary, McGraw Edison Company. We affirm for substantially the reasons stated in Judge Elfvin’s opinion. New York, et al. v. Panex Indus., Inc., et al., 94-CV-0400E(F), 2001 WL 241791 (W.D.N.Y. Mar.8, 2001).

Appellants rely here (as with the district court) on the less-than-optimal phrasings of the contract. But they offer no competing, integrated reading that favors their position. In any event, appellants as indemnitees had the burden to show that there was “a ‘clear and unmistakable intent’ to indemnify.” Commander Oil Corp. v. Advance Food Serv. Equip., 991 F.2d 49, 51 (2d Cir.1993). Quibbles, grammatical imperfections, convoluted statements, and near ambiguities are not enough.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

41 F. App'x 516, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-of-new-york-v-panex-industries-inc-ca2-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack