WEAVER COOKE CONSTRUCTION, LLC v. GOURAS, INC., 5:14-CV-713-BR (2016)
Court: District Court, E.D. North Carolina
Number: infdco20160816945
Visitors: 22
Filed: Aug. 15, 2016
Latest Update: Aug. 15, 2016
Summary: ORDER W. EARL BRITT , Senior District Judge . This matter is before the court on Weaver Cooke Construction, LLC's ("Weaver Cooke") appeal from the 26 September 2014 order of United States Bankruptcy Judge Stephani W. Humrickhouse. In that order, the bankruptcy court granted summary judgment in favor of appellee Gouras, Inc. ("Gouras") on Weaver Cooke's contractual indemnity claim. In another appeal from the same underlying proceeding, the identical indemnification provisions were at issue,
Summary: ORDER W. EARL BRITT , Senior District Judge . This matter is before the court on Weaver Cooke Construction, LLC's ("Weaver Cooke") appeal from the 26 September 2014 order of United States Bankruptcy Judge Stephani W. Humrickhouse. In that order, the bankruptcy court granted summary judgment in favor of appellee Gouras, Inc. ("Gouras") on Weaver Cooke's contractual indemnity claim. In another appeal from the same underlying proceeding, the identical indemnification provisions were at issue, a..
More
ORDER
W. EARL BRITT, Senior District Judge.
This matter is before the court on Weaver Cooke Construction, LLC's ("Weaver Cooke") appeal from the 26 September 2014 order of United States Bankruptcy Judge Stephani W. Humrickhouse. In that order, the bankruptcy court granted summary judgment in favor of appellee Gouras, Inc. ("Gouras") on Weaver Cooke's contractual indemnity claim. In another appeal from the same underlying proceeding, the identical indemnification provisions were at issue, and this court held that, among other things, neither N.C. Gen. Stat. § 22B-1 nor the contributing negligence of other parties precluded Weaver Cooke's indemnification claim against the subcontractor. See Weaver Cooke Constr., LLC v. Stock Bldg. Supply, LLC, No. 5:14-CV-537-BR, DE # 53 (E.D.N.C. Aug. 12, 2016). The parties here have raised similar arguments to those raised in the earlier appeal, and the issues are ones of law.1 Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in the Stock Building Supply case, the 26 September 2014 order of the bankruptcy court is AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, and REMANDED for further proceedings.
FootNotes
1. Gouras alternatively argues that, even if the primary indemnification provision in its subcontract with Weaver Cooke is valid, Weaver Cooke still is not "entitled to indemnification from Gouras because Weaver Cooke has offered no evidence that the installation of [materials] by Gouras and/or its subcontractors proximately caused water intrusion into the buildings at the Project." (DE # 36, at 19.) This argument does not appear to have been raised before the bankruptcy court, and the court will not consider it now.
Source: Leagle
