HARRISBURG – A Greencastle construction vehicle manufacturer alleges a Virginia company failed to accept its request for indemnification per an agreement.
Jerr-Dan Corp. filed a complaint on Dec. 18 in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania against Best Equipment Corp. citing defense and indemnification as required by the distribution agreement.
According to the complaint, the plaintiff and defendant entered into an agreement in 2003 where the plaintiff would provide equipment for the defendant for resale. The plaintiff alleges this agreement included an indemnification clause.
The suit states in June 2013, an individual named the plaintiff as a defendant in a personal injury suit and amended it to add Best as a defendant in 2015.
The plaintiff holds Best Equipment Corp. responsible because the defendant allegedly failed to accept its request that it defendant and indemnify it in the suit according to the defendant's contractual obligations.
The plaintiff seeks declaration that the defendant owes the plaintiff defense and indemnification regarding the lawsuit, court costs and any further relief the court grants. It is represented by Stephen D. Menard of Trabucco & Menard PLLC in Plymouth Meeting and Anthony J. Colucci, Marybeth P. Mantharam and Torrey E. Grenada of Colucci & Gallaher PC in Buffalo, New York.
U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania case number 1:17-cv-02337-CCC