Background
Ashley Ambrose sued Command Construction Industries, LLC in the principal action. Command then brought a third-party claim against Ascension Quality Materials, LLC, seeking defense and indemnity under a purchase order.
The purchase order required Ascension Quality Materials to defend and indemnify Command for losses arising from claims against Command caused by Ascension Quality Materials’ acts or omissions in performing the purchase order. Ambrose’s petition alleged claims only against Command and did not allege that any act or omission by Ascension Quality Materials caused those claims.
The Court’s Holding
The First Circuit granted Ascension Quality Materials’ supervisory-writ application and held that it was entitled to summary judgment. The court concluded that the contract’s indemnity language did not cover the claims in Ambrose’s petition because those claims were not alleged to have been caused by Ascension Quality Materials.
The court also held that the clause did not clearly and unequivocally require Ascension Quality Materials to indemnify Command for Command’s own negligence. Louisiana law does not extend an indemnity obligation to an indemnitee’s own negligence without express contractual language showing that intent.
Key Takeaways
- An indemnity clause limited to claims caused by the indemnitor’s acts or omissions does not reach allegations solely against the indemnitee.
- Indemnification for an indemnitee’s own negligence requires clear and unequivocal contractual language.
- The court reversed the trial court’s March 3, 2026 judgment and dismissed Command’s third-party claims against Ascension Quality Materials.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that Louisiana courts will enforce the causal limits written into an indemnity clause. Construction contracts seeking protection for an indemnitee’s own negligence must say so plainly; general defense-and-indemnity language will not suffice.