This appeal showcases Matt’s ability to turn a complex indemnification dispute into a decisive risk-transfer victory. After digging into the record and the underlying contracts, Matt discovered that the Appellate Division had relied on the wrong precedent—one involving a contract with materially different language. He used that flaw to successfully obtain leave to appeal to the New York Court of Appeals, a rare achievement in itself.

Matt persuaded the Court of Appeals judges that the construction contract’s indemnification clause applied to the jobsite where the accident occurred, even though the agreement did not list the specific location by name. That argument became the key to shifting exposure away from the property owner and upstream parties.

The Court of Appeals agreed, issuing a decision that strengthens how indemnity provisions are enforced under Workers’ Compensation Law § 11. For insurers and claims professionals, the ruling provides a clearer path to pursuing contractual indemnification against employers in employee-injury cases—expanding opportunities for risk transfer and reducing loss exposure in New York construction litigation.

This result reflects Matt’s strategic approach: rigorous contract analysis, appellate precision, and a focus on outcomes that matter directly to carriers and their insureds.

Photo by Troy Mortier