Indemnity in Florida

15 authorities

• statuteFla. Stat. § 725.06enactment date not established
  The words that state the rule

  (1) Any portion of any agreement or contract for or in connection with, or any guarantee of or in connection with, any construction, alteration, repair, or demolition of a building, structure, appurtenance, or appliance, including moving and excavating associated therewith, between an owner of real property and an architect, engineer, general contractor, subcontractor, sub-subcontractor, or materialman or any combination thereof wherein any party referred to herein promises to indemnify or hold harmless the other party to the agreement, contract, or guarantee for liability for damages to persons or property caused in whole or in part by any act, omission, or default of the indemnitee arising from the contract or its performance, shall be void and unenforceable unless the contract contains a monetary limitation on the extent of the indemnification that bears a reasonable commercial relationship to the contract and is part of the project specifications or bid documents, if any. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the monetary limitation on the extent of the indemnification provided to the owner of real property by any party in privity of contract with such owner shall not be less than $1 million per occurrence, unless otherwise agreed by the parties.

• statuteFla. Stat. § 725.06enactment date not established
  The words that state the rule

  Indemnification provisions in any such agreements, contracts, or guarantees may not require that the indemnitor indemnify the indemnitee for damages to persons or property caused in whole or in part by any act, omission, or default of a party other than:(a) The indemnitor; (b) Any of the indemnitor’s contractors, subcontractors, sub-subcontractors, materialmen, or agents of any tier or their respective employees; or (c) The indemnitee or its officers, directors, agents, or employees. However, such indemnification shall not include claims of, or damages resulting from, gross negligence, or willful, wanton or intentional misconduct of the indemnitee or its officers, directors, agents or employees, or for statutory violation or punitive damages except and to the extent the statutory violation or punitive damages are caused by or result from the acts or omissions of the indemnitor or any of the indemnitor’s contractors, subcontractors, sub-subcontractors, materialmen, or agents of any tier or their respective employees.

• statuteFla. Stat. § 725.06enactment date not established
  The words that state the rule

  (2) A construction contract for a public agency or in connection with a public agency’s project may require a party to that contract to indemnify and hold harmless the other party to the contract, their officers and employees, from liabilities, damages, losses and costs, including, but not limited to, reasonable attorney’s fees, to the extent caused by the negligence, recklessness, or intentional wrongful misconduct of the indemnifying party and persons employed or utilized by the indemnifying party in the performance of the construction contract. (3) Except as specifically provided in subsection (2), a construction contract for a public agency or in connection with a public agency’s project may not require one party to indemnify, defend, or hold harmless the other party, its employees, officers, directors, or agents from any liability, damage, loss, claim, action, or proceeding, and any such contract provision is void as against public policy of this state.

• statuteFla. Stat. § 725.06enactment date not established
  The words that state the rule

  (4) This section does not affect any contracts, agreements, or guarantees entered into before the effective date of this section or any renewals thereof.

• statuteFla. Stat. § 725.08enactment date not established
  The words that state the rule

  (1) Notwithstanding the provisions of s. 725.06, if a design professional provides professional services to or for a public agency, the agency may require in a professional services contract with the design professional that the design professional indemnify and hold harmless the agency, and its officers and employees, from liabilities, damages, losses, and costs, including, but not limited to, reasonable attorneys’ fees, to the extent caused by the negligence, recklessness, or intentionally wrongful conduct of the design professional and other persons employed or utilized by the design professional in the performance of the contract. (2) Except as specifically provided in subsection (1), a professional services contract entered into with a public agency may not require that the design professional defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the agency, its employees, officers, directors, or agents from any liability, damage, loss, claim, action, or proceeding, and any such contract provision shall be void as against the public policy of this state.

• case272 So. 2d 507University Plaza Shopping Center, Inc. v. StewartFla.decided 1973-01-24read it at the source ↗
  The words that state the rule

  In the lease agreement tenant (indemnitor) promises to indemnify landlord (indemnitee) "from and against any and all claims." The indemnity provision does not specifically or affirmatively require indemnification for losses or claims arising from indemnitee's sole negligence.

• case272 So. 2d 507University Plaza Shopping Center, Inc. v. StewartFla.decided 1973-01-24read it at the source ↗
  The words that state the rule

  In our judgment, the use of the general terms "indemnify ... against any and all claims" does not disclose an intention to indemnify for consequences arising solely from the negligence of the indemnitee.

• case272 So. 2d 507University Plaza Shopping Center, Inc. v. StewartFla.decided 1973-01-24read it at the source ↗
  The words that state the rule

  By way of caveat, we note that this cause is for liability resulting solely from the negligence of the indemnitee. With this crucial factor in mind, we specifically limit our decision to similar factual situations by saying the general clause "indemnify ... against any and all claims" or equivalent language does not authorize indemnification for negligence committed by the indemnitee alone.

• case272 So. 2d 507University Plaza Shopping Center, Inc. v. StewartFla.decided 1973-01-24read it at the source ↗
  The words that state the rule

  Accordingly, the decisions in Thomas Awning and Tent Co. v. Toby's Twelfth Cafeteria, supra , and St. Pierre v. Food Fair Stores, North Dade, Inc., supra, are overruled in the enunciation of the principle that an indemnity contract written in general language includes the indemnitee's ordinary negligence, so far as inconsistent with this opinion, and are no longer binding as precedent in the courts of this state. The decision of the District Court of Appeal, First District, affirming the final judgment by the able trial judge is hereby approved and the writ of certiorari is discharged.

• case374 So. 2d 487Charles Poe Masonry, Inc. v. Spring Lock Scaffolding Rental Equipment Co.Fla.decided 1979-07-05read it at the source ↗
  The words that state the rule

  With respect to the possibility of contractual indemnity, we take note that contracts of indemnification which attempt to indemnify a party against its own wrongful acts are viewed with disfavor in Florida. Florida Power & Light Co. v. Elmore, 189 So.2d 522 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966); Nat Harrison Associates, Inc. v. Florida Power & Light Co., 162 So.2d 298 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964). Such contracts will be enforced only if they express an intent to indemnify against the indemnitee's own wrongful acts in clear and unequivocal terms. University Plaza Shopping Center, Inc. v. Stewart, 272 So.2d 507 (Fla. 1973).

• case374 So. 2d 487Charles Poe Masonry, Inc. v. Spring Lock Scaffolding Rental Equipment Co.Fla.decided 1979-07-05read it at the source ↗
  The words that state the rule

  The underscored provision employs exactly the sort of "general terms" which we held in University Plaza do not disclose an intention to indemnify for consequences arising from the wrongful acts of the indemnitee. [2] The language of the lease agreement demonstrates nothing more than an undertaking by Poe to hold Spring Lock harmless from any vicarious liability which might result from Poe's erection, maintenance or use of the scaffold. It does not envision indemnity for Spring Lock's affirmative misconduct, whether in connection with design and manufacture or erection, maintenance and use of the scaffold.

• case374 So. 2d 487Charles Poe Masonry, Inc. v. Spring Lock Scaffolding Rental Equipment Co.Fla.decided 1979-07-05read it at the source ↗
  The words that state the rule

  Leonard L. Farber Co. v. Jaksch is readily distinguishable from this case. There the lease provided that "Lessee shall indemnify LESSOR and save it harmless from suits ... occasioned wholly or in part by any act or omission of Lessee ... ." 335 So.2d at 847-48 (emphasis supplied). The district court correctly determined that the "in part" language above manifested lessee's clear and unequivocal intent to indemnify lessor in cases where the lessee and lessor are found to be jointly at fault. The lease here under review contains no such explicit provision, and thus the district court erred in relying on Farber to reach its decision.

• case374 So. 2d 487Charles Poe Masonry, Inc. v. Spring Lock Scaffolding Rental Equipment Co.Fla.decided 1979-07-05read it at the source ↗
  The words that state the rule

  We are not unmindful of the fact that the majority in University Plaza limited its holding to instances where liability is based solely on the fault of the indemnitee. However, the public policy underlying that decision applies with equal force here, that is, to instances where the indemnitor and indemnitee are jointly liable.

• case374 So. 2d 487Charles Poe Masonry, Inc. v. Spring Lock Scaffolding Rental Equipment Co.Fla.decided 1979-07-05read it at the source ↗
  The words that state the rule

  Hence we extend the holding in University Plaza to cases where the indemnitor and indemnitee are jointly liable. Accordingly, the writ of certiorari is granted, the decision of the District Court of Appeal, Third District, is approved in part and quashed in part, and the cause is remanded to the district court with instructions to reinstate the judgment of the trial court.

• statuteFla. Stat. § 725.08enactment date not established
  The words that state the rule

  (3) “Professional services contract” means a written or oral agreement relating to the planning, design, construction, administration, study, evaluation, consulting, or other professional and technical support services furnished in connection with any actual or proposed construction, improvement, alteration, repair, maintenance, operation, management, relocation, demolition, excavation, or other facility, land, air, water, or utility development or improvement. (4) “Design professional” means an individual or entity licensed by the state who holds a current certificate of registration or is qualified under chapter 481 to practice architecture or landscape architecture, under chapter 472 to practice land surveying and mapping, or under chapter 471 to practice engineering, and who enters into a professional services contract.