This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...

Focus (Forum & Focus)

Apr. 17, 2009

Contracting Clarity

The Supreme Court has finally provided guidance on implied contractual indemnity, writes Daniel Lee Jacobson.

FOCUS COLUMN

By Daniel Lee Jacobson

One realizes that he has reached the zenith of attorney-nerdness when he is enthralled with the Supreme Court's publication of a case that finally puts to rest what he has seen as a burning controversy; whether implied contractual indemnity sounds in contract. But even non-nerds will benefit from the Supreme Court's clarity on the subject, the nailed-down description of just what implied contractual indemnity is...

To continue reading, please subscribe.
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!

Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)

Already a subscriber?

Enewsletter Sign-up