NC General Statutes

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 22B-1 (2026)

Certain indemnity and defend agreements invalid

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NCLEGncleg.gov (official) JustiaChapter 22B CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Provisions in, or in connection with, a construction agreement or design professional agreement purporting to require a promisor to indemnify or hold harmless the promisee, the promisee's independent contractors, agents, employees, or indemnitees against liability for damages arising out of bodily injury to persons or damage to property proximately caused by or resulting from the negligence, in whole or in part, of the promisee, its independent contractors, agents, employees, or indemnitees, is against public policy, void and unenforceable. Nothing contained in this subsection shall prevent or prohibit a contract, promise or agreement whereby a promisor shall indemnify or hold harmless any promisee or the promisee's independent contractors, agents, employees or indemnitees against liability for damages resulting from the sole negligence of the promisor, its agents or employees.

(b) Provisions in, or in connection with, a construction agreement or design professional agreement purporting to require a promisor to indemnify or hold harmless the promisee, the promisee's independent contractors, agents, employees, indemnitees, or any other person or entity against losses, damages, or expenses are against public policy, void, and unenforceable unless the the fault of the promisor or its derivative parties is a proximate cause of the loss, damage, or expense indemnified.

(c) Provisions in, or in connection with, a construction agreement that includes design professional services or a design professional agreement purporting to require a design professional to defend a promisee, the promisee's independent contractors, agents, or employees, the promisee's indemnitees, or any other person or entity against liability or claims for damages or expenses, including attorney's fees, proximately caused or allegedly caused by the professional negligence, in whole or in part, of the promisor, the promisee, or their derivative parties, whether the claim is alleged or brought in tort or contract, is against public policy, void, and unenforceable.

(d) Nothing in this section shall be interpreted to exclude from any indemnity or hold harmless provisions enforceable under subsections (a) and (b) of this section attorneys' fees, litigation or arbitration expenses, or court costs actually incurred by the promisee to defend against third party claims alleged in any court, tribunal, or alternative dispute resolution procedure required of the promisee by law or by contract, if the fault of the promisor or its derivative parties is a proximate cause of the attorney's fees litigation or arbitration expenses, or court costs to be indemnified.

(e) This section shall not affect an insurance contract, workers' compensation, or any other agreement issued by an insurer. This section shall not apply to lien or bond claims asserted under Chapter 44A of the General Statutes.

(f) For purposes of this section, the following definitions shall apply:

(1) Construction agreement. - Any promise or agreement in, or in connection with, a contract or agreement relative to the design, planning, construction, alteration, repair, or maintenance of a building, structure, highway, road, appurtenance, or appliance, including moving, demolition, and excavating connected therewith.

(2) Defend. - Any obligation to pay for or furnish counsel at the expense of the promisor to defend a promisee, the promisee's independent contractors, agents, employees, or indemnitees against claims alleged or brought against the promisee, the promisee's independent contractors, agents, employees, or indemnitees by a third party alleged or brought in any court or other tribunal, including forms of alternative dispute resolution required by law or contract, before the court or tribunal has reached a final determination of fault.

(3) Derivative parties. - With respect to a party, any of that party's subcontractors, agents, employees, or other persons or entities for which the party may be liable or responsible as a result of any statutory, tort, or contractual duty.

(4) Design professional. - A person or entity who is licensed under and provides professional services regulated by Chapters 83A, 89A, 89C, 89E, or 89F of the General Statutes.

(5) Design professional agreement. - Any promise or agreement in, or in connection with, a contract or agreement with a design professional to provide design professional services.

(6) Design professional services. - A service or work performed by a design professional for which licensure is required under Chapters 83A, 89A, 89C, 89E, or 89F of the General Statutes.

(7) Fault. - A breach of contract; negligent, reckless, or intentional act or omission constituting a tort under applicable statutes or common law; or violations of applicable statutes or regulations.

(8) Subcontractor. - Any person or entity, of any tier, providing labor or material through the promisor for use on the project at issue in the applicable construction agreement or design professional agreement. (1979, c. 597, s. 1; 1991, c. 636, s. 3; 1993, c. 553, s. 12; 2019-92, s. 1.)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 35 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1988–2026 · leading case: Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc. v. Ogden Plant Maint. Co. of North Carolina, 548 S.E.2d 807 (N.C. Ct. App. 2001).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc. v. Ogden Plant Maint. Co. of North Carolina, 548 S.E.2d 807 (N.C. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 54× “In the instant case, the indemnity provision in the contract between plaintiff and defendant Ogden is as follows in pertinent part: Except as provided in Article XIII of this contract, [defendant Ogden] shall indemnify [plaintiff] and save it harmless from damage to or theft of…”

Jackson v. Associated Scaffolders & Equip. Co., 568 S.E.2d 666 (N.C. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 50× “Associated argues that an indemnity provision in a construction contract is valid and enforceable, and is not barred by N.C.G.S. § 22B-1, insofar as it does not purport to indemnify the indemnitee (Associated) for the indemnitee's own negligence.”

Morrell v. Hardin Creek, Inc., 821 S.E.2d 360 (N.C. 2018). · cites it 12× “Due to an initial erroneous supposition that plaintiffs’ depiction of Paragraph 5(b)’s language at issue as ambiguous is meritorious, coupled with a misplaced reliance on the applicability of N.C.G.S. § 22B-1’s public policy declarations which do not apply to a building outside…”

One Beacon Ins. v. United Mech. Corp., 700 S.E.2d 121 (N.C. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 16× “their breach of contract claim, we must analyze the contents of the indemnity clause contained in the Industrial Piping-United Mechanical contract, a process which, in turn, requires consideration of (1) the general law of indemnity, (2) the language of the indemnity clause…”

Int'l Paper Co. v. Corporex Constructors, Inc., 385 S.E.2d 553 (N.C. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 12× “1 is void because it contains a clause which violates N.C. Gen. Stat. § 22B-1 (1986). G.S. § 22B-1 in pertinent part provides as follows: Any promise or agreement in, or in connection with, a contract or agreement relative to the design, planning, construction, alteration,…”

Blaylock Grading Co., LLP v. Smith, 658 S.E.2d 680 (N.C. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 15× “nance of a building, structure, highway, road, appurtenance or appliance, including moving, demolition and excavating connected therewith, purporting to indemnify or hold harmless the promisee, the promisee’s independent contractots, agents, employees, or indemnitees against…”

Crescent Univ. City Venture, LLC v. Ap Atl., Inc., 2019 NCBC 46 (N.C. Bus. Ct. 2019). · cites it 37× “As discussed further in connection with T.A. Kaiser’s Motion below, the court held that the majority of the examined indemnity agreement was lawful because it promised only that the subcontractor would indemnify the general contractor for damages arising out of or caused by the…”

City of Wilmington v. North Carolina Nat. Gas Corp., 450 S.E.2d 573 (N.C. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 12× “Defendant’s fourth defense provided that the franchise agreement was void under G.S. 22B-1 insofar as it might require defendant to indemnify plaintiff from plaintiff’s own negligence.”

Miller Brewing Co. v. Morgan Mech. Contractors, Inc., 368 S.E.2d 438 (N.C. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 12× “On appeal, plaintiff contends that the trial court, sitting without a jury, erred in its conclusions of law (i) that the indemnity and hold harmless provisions printed on the back of the purchase order are against public policy, void, and unenforceable under G.S. 22B-1 because…”

Pennsylvania Nat'l Mut. Cas. Ins. v. Associated Scaffolders & Equip. Co., 579 S.E.2d 404 (N.C. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 6× “This contract in its entirety was adjudicated void by this Court in the above referenced Jackson case as against section 22B-1 of the General Statutes, which pertains to construction indemnity agreements.”

Vecellio & Grogan, Inc. v. Piedmont Drilling & Blasting, Inc., 644 S.E.2d 16 (N.C. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 4× “” Under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 22B-1 (2005), a construction contract generally may not include a provision whereby a party is indemnified for its own negligence.”

Cananwill, Inc. v. EMAR Grp., Inc., 250 B.R. 533 (M.D.N.C. 1999). · cites it 6× “§ 58-3-15 (clauses or provisions requiring insured to take or maintain larger amounts of insurance than expressed in policy or providing that insured is liable as coinsurer with insurance company are “null and void, and of no effect”); N.”

Show all 35 citing cases →

— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 22B-1(a) — 2 cases

Loera v. Stellar HVAC, LLC (E.D.N.C. 2025).

Taveney v. Int'l Paper Co. (E.D.N.C. 2022).

— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 22B-1(e) — 1 case

Loera v. Stellar HVAC, LLC (E.D.N.C. 2025).

— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 22B-1(f)(1) — 3 cases

Pcs Phosphate Co. v. Jacobs Eng'g Grp., Inc., 2026 NCBC 15 (N.C. Bus. Ct. 2026).

Taveney v. Int'l Paper Co. (E.D.N.C. 2022).

Blastmaster Holdings USA, LLC v. Land Coast Insulation (N.C. Ct. App. 2024).

— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 22B-1(f)(5) — 1 case

Blastmaster Holdings USA, LLC v. Land Coast Insulation (N.C. Ct. App. 2024).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.