Oregon has a law, similar to many other states, prohibiting
overbroad indemnities in construction contracts. The Oregon Supreme
Court has ruled that the law allows an arguably overbroad indemnity
to be enforced within the statutory constraints, rather than being
entirely invalidated. The court concluded that two sections of the
anti-indemnity law, read together, had the effect of
"saving" an overbroad indemnity.
The indemnity in question required the subcontractor to
indemnify the prime contractor from claims "whether or not
caused in part by [the prime]." The trial court held that this
indemnity ran afoul of subsection (1) of the Oregon law, ORS § 30.140,
which states that an overbroad indemnity "is void." But
subsection (2) reads, in part: "This section does not affect
any provision in a construction agreement that requires a person
... to indemnify another against liability ... to the extent that
the ... injury ... arises out of the fault of the indemnitor."
Also,
