Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 09 JANUARY 2013

Texas Indemnity And Express Negligence

A recent Texas Court of Appeals decision (Tutle & Tutle Trucking v. EOG Resources, Inc., Waco Court of Appeals 2012) illustrates the importance of carefully drafting indemnity clauses in oil and gas Master Service Agreements.

United StatesEnergy and Natural Resources

A recent Texas Court of Appeals decision (Tutle & Tutle Trucking v. EOG Resources, Inc., Waco Court of Appeals 2012) illustrates the importance of carefully drafting indemnity clauses in oil and gas Master Service Agreements. EOG had a Master Services Agreement with Tutle, a trucking company. Frac Source was a contractor of EOG's and had a separate MSA with EOG. Tutle's employee, Henderson, was injured, apparently in Texas, while assisting Frac Source in unloading sand from a Frac Source truck. Henderson sued Frac Source and Tutle for negligence, but never made a claim directly against EOG, claiming that Frac Source had modified or removed a safety device from its equipment, rendering such equipment unreasonably dangerous. Frac Source then made demand on EOG to defend and indemnify it under the EOG/Frac Source MSA. EOG, in turn, demanded indemnity from Tutle under the EOG/Tutle MSA.1

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from