CRAIG LINDSAY V CITY OF DETROIT
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
CRAIG LINDSAY and PAULETTE LINDSAY,,
UNPUBLISHED
June 27, 1997
Plaintiffs,
v
No. 183512
Wayne Circuit Court
LC No. 93-332211-NO
CITY OF DETROIT, BEST AMERICAN
INDUSTRIAL SERVICES,
Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiffs/
Appellants,
ON REHEARING
and
EAGLE MECHANICAL COMPANY,
Defendant,
v
BEN WASHINGTON & SONS PLUMBING &
HEATING, INC.,
Third-Party Defendant/Appellee.
Before: Young, P.J., and Taylor and R. C. Livo*, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
The trial court granted summary disposition of the claims of Best American Industrial Services
and the City of Detroit for indemnification and breach of contract against Ben Washington & Sons
Plumbing & Heating, Inc. In an opinion issued on January 17, 1997, we reversed with respect to both
counts. Ben Washington filed a timely motion for rehearing, which we granted in an order issued on
April 23, 1997. Upon further review, we affirm in part and reverse in part.
-1
In our initial opinion we held that summary disposition of the indemnification claim had been
improperly granted. In its motion for rehearing Ben Washington argues that our holding was contrary to
MSI Construction Managers v Corvo Iron Works, 208 Mich App 340; 527 NW2d 79 (1995), and
failed to consider the fact that a jury verdict against Best had already been reduced by the amount of
Craig Lindsay’s comparative negligence. To its credit, Best has acknowledged that our holding vis-a
vis the indemnification claim is in conflict with MSI, which we are bound to follow pursuant to
Administrative Order No. 1996-4. It also is the case that our initial opinion neglected to consider the
adjusted jury verdict that had been entered. In light of the adjusted jury verdict, Best now argues that it
is only entitled to a percentage of the costs and fees it incurred in Lindsay’s lawsuit against it. Upon
further review, we affirm the trial court’s order granting summary disposition of the indemnification
claim. We remand to the trial court so that it may determine in the first instance whether Best is
contractually entitled to reimbursement for any of the costs and fees it incurred in defending against
Lindsay’s lawsuit.
After further review, we are satisfied that our initial reversal of the breach of contract claim was
proper.
Affirmed in part and reversed in part. Remanded for further proceedings consistent with this
Court’s opinion. We do not retain jurisdiction. No taxable costs pursuant to MCR 7.219, neither party
having prevailed in full.
/s/ Robert P. Young
/s/ Clifford W. Taylor
/s/ Robert C. Livo
-2
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.
