Corvus Energy Ltd. v. 1169997 Ontario, Ltd., No. 15-35859 (9th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CaseThe Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment for defendant in a third party contribution and indemnification action regarding fire damage to a tugboat. In McDermott, Inc. v. AmClyde, 511 U.S. 202 (1994), the Supreme Court addressed the issue of whether non-settling defendants in admiralty cases may seek contribution from a settling defendant. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling because Corvus settled with Foss and no fact-finder made a determination of fault, Foss explicitly released all claims against Corvus related to AKA's wrongdoing, and allowing Corvus’s indemnity action would dissuade settlement, contrary to the Supreme Court's rationale in AmClyde.
Court Description: Admiralty The panel affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendant in a third-party contribution and indemnification action concerning fire damage to a tugboat. Foss Maritime Co., the vessel owner, brought tort and contract claims against Corvus Energy Ltd., which impleaded 11699997 Ontario Ltd. d/b/a Askin Kemp & Associates (“AKA”). Foss added AKA as a defendant and settled with AKA, releasing claims against Corvus for liabilities arising from the actions or inaction of AKA. Corvus then settled with Foss. AKA successfully moved for summary judgment, seeking to dismiss Corvus’s third-party contribution and indemnity action against AKA. The panel held that Corvus could not seek indemnity against AKA because Corvus settled with Foss and no fact- finder made a determination of fault; Foss explicitly released
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.