Martinez v 56th Realty LLC

Holding The Appellate Division reversed the grant of summary judgment on the owner’s cross-claim for contractual indemnification because there was an issue of fact regarding whether the owner’s agents were negligent. Under General Obligations Law § 5-322.1(1), indemnification agreements are unenforceable to the extent they cover liability contributed to by the negligence of the promisee’s agents.

The court’s words

there is an issue of fact based on whether Glenwood and York were agents of Owner

2026 NY Slip Op 05373, at the official text

General Obligations Law § 5-322.1(1) provides that an agreement relating to building work purporting to indemnify or hold harmless the promisee against liability for damage arising out of bodily injury to persons . . . contributed to, caused by or resulting from the negligence of the promisee, [its] agents or employees, or indemnitee . . . is void and unenforceable.

2026 NY Slip Op 05373, at the official text

there is an issue of fact as to whether Glenwood or York was negligent in causing plaintiff's injuries and thus whether partial or full contractual indemnification of Owner would be prohibited based on the negligence of its agents

2026 NY Slip Op 05373, at the official text