{
  "id": 1709209,
  "name": "SOUTHSIDE WATER ASSOCIATION, INC. v. John HARGAN d/b/a HARGAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY",
  "name_abbreviation": "Southside Water Ass'n v. Hargan",
  "decision_date": "1980-09-03",
  "docket_number": "CA 80-67",
  "first_page": "117",
  "last_page": "121",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "270 Ark. 117"
    },
    {
      "type": "parallel",
      "cite": "630 S.W.2d 466"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark. Ct. App.",
    "id": 13370,
    "name": "Arkansas Court of Appeals"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "246 Ark. 559",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1604070
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1969,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/246/0559-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "249 Ark. 389",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        8720232
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1969,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/249/0389-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 382,
    "char_count": 6312,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.72,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.1984712604236653e-07,
      "percentile": 0.5930658505573105
    },
    "sha256": "d1dbc3d5f384016ecbbb9c5acd2a9f1bb78bb659f75bc86edb4d02a6ca628bcc",
    "simhash": "1:93ec71b66373972c",
    "word_count": 998
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:40:39.197564+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "SOUTHSIDE WATER ASSOCIATION, INC. v. John HARGAN d/b/a HARGAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Marian F. Penix, Judge.\nBoth parties were defendants in a lawsuit filed by Alva Bechdoldt, a water customer of appellant Southside Water Association, Inc. John Hargan, appellee, was working on the extension of a water system pursuant to a contract awarded to him by Southside. The extension work caused a substantial increase in water pressure which caused a valve to pop from Alva Bechdoldt\u2019s hot water heater. This accident resulted in personal injuries to Ms. Bechdoldt. She alleged in her complaint that both appellant and appellee were jointly and severally liable for negligence. The appellant answered Bechdoldt\u2019s complaint and cross-claimed against appellee seeking indemnity under its contract with appellee. The parties agreed the Court would decide the indemnity issue after the jury verdict on the personal injury claim. The trial court denied the appellant\u2019s claim for indemnity against appellee Hargan. The Water Association appeals.\nThe indemnity provision of the contract provided:\n15. Responsibility of Contractor, Protection of Work, Persons and Property\nC. The Contractor shall fully indemnify the Owner, the Engineers, and the representatives \u00a9f each, and hold them harmless against all liability, claims, judgments and demands for damages arising from injury to any person whomsoever, including death, and including, but not limited to employees of the Contractor, all subcontractors, and their employees, and which injury, death or damage may in any way arise out of the prosecution of the work hereunder by the Contractor or subcontractors, and without regard to negligence on the part of anyone whomsoever.\nThe personal injury case was submitted to the jury on interrogatories.\nInterrogatory No. 1: Do you find appellee (Hargan Construction Company) to have been guilty of negligence?\nAnswer. No.\nInterrogatory No. 2: Do you find appellant (Southside Water Association, Inc) was guilty of negligence?\nAnswer: Yes.\nSouthside Water Association alleges the Court erred in refusing to allow Southside\u2019s claim for contractual indemnity against Hargan Construction Company. We must look to the contract to determine if the damages to Ms. Bechdoldt \u201cin any way arise out of\u2019 Hargan\u2019s work under the contract, and if so, if Hargan agreed to be responsible for such damages.\nSouthside\u2019s Contract provided for a line item bid on each item of work contained on the Contract. Southside elected to withhold from the contract some items which would be needed, i.e., the purchase and installation of pressure-reducing valves for those users who would be located in areas of high pressure. The contract did not include furnishing or installing pressure regulators.\nSouthside\u2019s manager, Andrew Duchanoy, testified high pressure caused the Bechdoldt accident. When asked what could have been done to prevent the high water pressure from causing the accident he replied the only thing that could have been done was to put a pressure regulator on the meter. When asked if the contract called for Hargan to put in pressure regulators, Duchanoy answered that the contract did not call for such. He further testified Mr. Graham, a consulting engineer, had informed the Water Board the new construction by Hargan would cause high and low pressures. He also testified it became the Water Association\u2019s responsibility to furnish a regulator for Ms. Bechdoldt\u2019s line between her meter and her house. He stated Hargan\u2019s responsibility ended at the customer\u2019s meter.\nHargan argues, with merit, Southside\u2019s appeal ignores the contractual defined as \u201cwork to be performed by the contractor or subcontractor including labor and/or materials.\u201d . Hargan further argues the duty to provide or install pressure regulators is not contained within Hargan\u2019s contract. Hence, the injury could not have arisen due to the prosecution of work under the contract.\nHowever, under the broad terms of this contract \u201c. . . which injury or damage may in any way arise out of the prosecution of the work hereunder. . .\u201d, the evidence leaves little doubt that the occurrence was in fact caused by the work done under the contract. The increase in pressure caused the valve to pop which in turn directly caused the injury. The work done by the Appellant, Hargan, caused the increase in the water pressure. The high pressure was the result of the \u201cprosecution of the work\u201d. The failure of the Water Association to buy and install a pressure reducing valve was negligence but under this contract is. of no importance. The broad sweeping language of the indemnity contract, clearly and unequivocally states Hargan will not be relieved of liability by the negligence of anyone. The 1970 case of Pickens Bond Construction Co. v. North Little Rock Electric Co., 249 Ark. 389, 459 S.W. 2d 549 states the Arkansas position as originally expressed by Justice Brown in Hardeman v. Hass Co., 246 Ark. 559, 439 S.W. 2d 281 (1969):\nThe precise question: is whether this indemnity provision obligates the subcontractor to indemnify the prime contractor for damages arising out of the negligence of the prime contractor which was the proximate ca\u00fcse of Turpin\u2019s injuries. The intention of Hass to so obligate itself must be expressed in clear and unequivocal terms and to the extent that no other meaning can be ascribed. 41 Am. Jur 2d, Indemnity \u00a715. Where an injury is caused by the sole negligence of the indemnitee many courts in interpreting the indemnity contract predicate their intepretation on the theory that such a liability would be unusual and harsh; consequently, the courts endeavor to relieve the indemnitor of liability to the negligent indemnitee. 175 A.L.R., p. 32, \u00a718. [Emphasis supplied].\nThe language of this indemnity contract is very clear and unequivocal.\nIn reviewing the record and reading the terms of the contract, we find the injury to Mrs. Bechdoldt to have been a direct result of the \u201cprosecution of work\u201d by Hargan. Consequently, Hargan must now indemnify the Water Association for the injury to Ms. Bechdoldt.\nReversed and remanded for proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Marian F. Penix, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "H. David Blair, for appellant.",
      "James A. McLarty for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "SOUTHSIDE WATER ASSOCIATION, INC. v. John HARGAN d/b/a HARGAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY\nCA 80-67\n630 S.W. 2d 466\nCourt of Appeals of Arkansas\nOpinion delivered September 3, 1980\nH. David Blair, for appellant.\nJames A. McLarty for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0117-01",
  "first_page_order": 143,
  "last_page_order": 147
}