News & Events

On July 14, 2015, the Southern District of New York dismissed a complaint filed by Dresser-Rand Company (“Dresser-Rand”) against Simpson Thacher client Ingersoll Rand Company (“Ingersoll Rand”). The complaint alleged that Ingersoll Rand had breached a contractual obligation to defend and indemnify Dresser-Rand against a lawsuit (naming both Ingersoll Rand and Dresser-Rand) pending in Saskatchewan, Canada, and involving a fire at a nitrogen fertilizer plant purportedly caused by faulty equipment. On Ingersoll Rand’s behalf, the Firm moved to dismiss the indemnity and defense claims as unripe. At a pre-motion conference, Dresser-Rand conceded that its indemnification claim was premature. In a 22-page decision, Judge Katharine Polk Failla dismissed Dresser-Rand’s complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, finding that Ingersoll Rand’s duty to defend is co-extensive with its duty to indemnify, and thus the entire action was premature. Judge Failla clarified that under New York law, because Ingersoll Rand is not an insurer, its contractual duty to defend is not presumptively broader than its duty to indemnify, and must be strictly construed under the terms of the contract. Judge Failla found that the contract in this case placed the indemnification and defense obligations on equal footing, and the scope of both obligations is contingent upon the determination of whether Dresser-Rand’s acts or omissions are responsible for the losses in the Canadian case.

The Simpson Thacher team included Lynn Neuner, Noah Leibowitz, Rachel Sparks Bradley and Daniel Levien.