I repeat: indemnity protections are all dead” in response to the Court Order ruling on Motions for Partial Summary Judgment on the issue of indemnity protections for compensatory and punitive damages, penalties, enhanced penalties and fines. ------------------------------------------ I think we can all agree that the only victory regards compensatory damages, #1 in the summary: "is required to indemnify negligence, or gross negligence."
#2. No indemnity for punitive damages (which will be a multiple of compensatory if gross negligence or willful misconduct are proved)
#3 No indemnity for fines (even if gross negligence is not proved)
anyway, even the indemnity for compensatory damages will be nullified (as will Bg's indemnity because you will note that in the actual reasoning (pgs 16-18 are critical) he discusses the difference between willful misconduct and gross negligence with regard to nullifying the indemnity("indemnification agreements are unenforceable as violative of public policy only to the extent that they purport to indemnify a party for damages flowing from intentional causation of injury" so that indemnification may be permitted when grossly negligent conduct was alleged and found. (bold type)
Moreover, he notes that he cites to Section 2716 where willful misconduct is a defense to enforcement of indemnity, but not gross negligence.....
Everyone should be focussing on "willful misconduct"....that is the only issue now....without settlement you essentially have a bimodal distribution of outcomes, two extremes there's no middle ground now and the mean has not shifted one inch.