{"id":5441,"date":"2025-08-15T13:11:41","date_gmt":"2025-08-15T13:11:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/?p=5441"},"modified":"2025-08-18T11:56:41","modified_gmt":"2025-08-18T11:56:41","slug":"recovery-of-attorneys-fees-under-indemnity-provisions-the-devil-is-in-the-details","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/2025\/08\/15\/recovery-of-attorneys-fees-under-indemnity-provisions-the-devil-is-in-the-details\/","title":{"rendered":"Recovery of Attorney\u2019s Fees Under Indemnity Provisions: The Devil is in the Details"},"content":{"rendered":"
By Lucas T. Clayton<\/h6>\n
Luke is a shareholder of the firm\u2019s Construction Law Department. He can be reached at 612.359.7628 or LClayton@fwhtlaw.com<\/a><\/span><\/h6>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 One of the most important and consequential provisions of any construction contract are the defense and indemnity terms. Most contracts make clear that if a third party makes a claim against the person being indemnified (the Indemnitee), then the person making the indemnification promise (the Indemnitor) has to pay for the defense of the Indemnitee. In Minnesota, however, the language allowing this recovery of attorney\u2019s fees must be explicitly and clear from the plain language of the contract. What often isn\u2019t clear in contracts, however, is whether the Indemnitee can recover its attorney\u2019s fees incurred to enforce<\/u><\/strong> the defense and indemnity provisions against the Indemnitor. It is particularly important for the Indemnitor to understand the scope of its obligations in this respect, because in the event that the Indemnitor is required to indemnify the Indemnitee for its attorney\u2019s fees in enforcing the indemnity provision, the Indemnitor\u2019s potential liability is significantly increased.\u00a0 This Briefing Paper will discuss the language contracting parties should look for in their indemnity provisions to ensure they understand the rights and obligations to which they have agreed.<\/p>\n

General Rules for Recovery of Attorney\u2019s Fees Under Indemnity Provisions<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 In the United States, each party to a litigation typically bears its own attorney\u2019s fees, known as the \u201cAmerican Rule.\u201d In order to overcome the American Rule, the parties can agree in their contract that one party will pay the attorney\u2019s fees of another. One common way this occurs in construction contracts is through the parties\u2019 defense and indemnity provisions in which the Indemnitor promises to defend (i.e. pay for the defense costs) of the Indemnitee if the Indemnitee is sued by a third party. In short, the parties agree to ignore the American Rule and pay for the other parties\u2019 attorney\u2019s fees and costs to defend against an indemnified claim.<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 However, in Minnesota, a provision that agrees to pay the other side\u2019s attorney\u2019s fees \u201cmust be sufficiently clear to overcome [the] presumption that each litigating party pays its own way.\u201d Aadland v. Ranweiler<\/em>, No. A17-1234, 2018 WL 1902457 at *7 (Minn. Ct. App. Apr. 23, 2018).\u00a0 This is especially true when one party seeks to have the other party pay for the attorney\u2019s fees it incurred to enforce<\/u><\/strong> an indemnity provision in the contract. If a party seeks attorney\u2019s fees and costs \u201cfor prosecuting [a] right to indemnification,\u201d the contract must \u201cexplicitly state[] so.\u201d Seifert v. Regents of Univ. of Minnesota<\/em>, 505 N.W.2d 83, 86 (Minn. Ct. App. 1993). Language in the contract that simply states that one party agrees to indemnify the other for attorney\u2019s fees \u201carising out of or resulting from\u201d an indemnified claim is not sufficient to entitle that party to the fees and cost incurred attempting to enforce its indemnification rights against the contracting party. Id. <\/em>at 85.<\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 Although somewhat confusing, Minnesota\u2019s approach to this issue makes perfect sense when one considers the purpose of an action to enforce an indemnity provision. When one party fails to indemnify the other party as required under the terms of the contract, a lawsuit to enforce the indemnity provision is essentially a breach of contract claim, not<\/u><\/strong> an indemnity claim itself asking for defense and protection from a third-party claim. See Id.<\/em> at 86. Thus, to show that the parties\u2019 intent was for one party to bear the cost of the other party\u2019s attorney\u2019s fees even in a breach of contract claim, that intent must be explicitly stated in the contract. Otherwise, Minnesota courts will refuse to infer that the parties intended to contravene the American Rule. If parties want to include the obligation to pay attorney\u2019s fees related to enforcing an indemnity agreement, the contract must include explicit language that provides for legal fees \u201cincurred to enforce the provisions of the [indemnification] paragraph.\u201d See, e.g.<\/em>, Van Vickle v. C. W. Scheurer & Sons, Inc.<\/em>, 556 N.W.2d 238, 242 (Minn. Ct. App. 1996).<\/p>\n

Engineering & Construction Innovations, Inc. v Bradshaw Construction Corporation<\/em>, <\/strong><\/p>\n

No. 20-CV-808 (ECT\/SGE), 2025 WL 1790679 (D. Minn. June 30, 2025)<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 This issue recently arose in a matter handled by our firm, Eng’g & Constr. Innovations, Inc. v. Bradshaw Constr. Corp.<\/em>, No. 20-CV-808 (ECT\/SGE), 2025 WL 1790679 (D. Minn. June 30, 2025).\u00a0 In that matter, our firm represented a subcontractor whose subcontract with the general contractor contained an indemnification provision wherein both parties agreed that if the general contractor was assessed liquidated damages by the owner due to the subcontractor\u2019s failure to perform according to the contractual schedule, the subcontractor would indemnify the general contractor for those liquidated damages.\u00a0 Specifically, the parties\u2019 subcontract provided that:<\/p>\n

Subcontractor will defend, indemnify and save harmless Contractor and Owner, and their respective officers, directors and agents, to the fullest extent of the law, from any and all claims, damages, and expenses, in whole or in part, including costs, expert fees, and reasonable attorney\u2019s fees, bodily injury or property damage, arising or in any way resulting from. . . [a]ny other liability to Owner or Contractor that Subcontractor caused including Liquidated Damages<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The general contractor brought a claim against the subcontractor alleging that it failed to indemnify the general for liquidated damages assessed against the general contractor by the owner.\u00a0 After a trial, the court found in favor of the general contractor and ruled that the subcontractor had failed to indemnify the general contractor for the liquidated damages in question.\u00a0 Subsequently, the general contractor made a motion to recover nearly $3.3 million in attorney\u2019s fees and costs related to the indemnity claim, arguing that its attorney\u2019s fees and costs associated with proving its failure to indemnify claim arose or resulted from the assessed liquidated damages.<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 In response, our firm argued that the parties\u2019 subcontract did not include any language explicitly providing that the subcontractor was required to pay the general contractor\u2019s legal fees for simply enforcing the indemnity provision, and accordingly the general should not be entitled to recover any of its attorney\u2019s fees or costs.\u00a0 The court agreed with this analysis and found that the general contractor was not entitled to recover the attorney\u2019s fees and costs it incurred enforcing the indemnity provision against the subcontractor. Eng’g & Constr. Innovations, Inc.<\/em>, 2025 WL 1790679 at * 2\u2013 3 (applying the rule from Seifert v. Regents of Univ. of Minnesota<\/em>, 505 N.W.2d 83 (Minn. Ct. App. 1993)). Consequently, we were able to successfully defend our client from a nearly $3.3 million judgment, which allowed the parties to resolve the case through a settlement.\u00a0 But for the fact that the indemnity provision at issue did not contain explicit language allowing for the recovery of attorney\u2019s fees for enforcing the provision, such a favorable result would not have been possible. This matter highlights how important it is for a contractor to understand the scope of its indemnity provisions and whether or not it is agreeing to pay the indemnified party\u2019s attorney\u2019s fees associated with simply enforcing the indemnity provision, and evidences the consequential impacts such language, or lack thereof, can have if the parties run into issues on a project that later must be litigated.<\/p>\n

Conclusion<\/strong><\/p>\n

Ultimately, the takeaway is that is imperative for contractors to read their indemnification provisions closely to determine what kind of risk they are accepting regarding attorney\u2019s fees. A failure to do so may end up exposing the contractor to far more liability for than it originally anticipated in the event it is found liable for an indemnified claim.<\/p>\n

Announcements<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n

Congratulations to the eight attorneys from\u00a0Fabyanske, Westra, Hart & Thomson, P.A.\u00a0<\/strong>who have been named 2025 \u201cMinnesota Super Lawyers\u201d. <\/strong>The polling, researching, and selecting of \u201cSuper Lawyers\u201d is designed to identify Minnesota lawyers who have attained a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. Only five percent of Minnesota attorneys receive this honor. FWHT\u2019s 2025 \u201cMinnesota Super Lawyers\u201d include\u00a0Mark Becker<\/a>,\u00a0Matt Collins,<\/a>\u00a0Hugh Brown,<\/a>\u00a0Julia Douglass<\/a>,\u00a0Rory Duggan,<\/a>\u00a0Kyle Hart<\/a>,\u00a0Jesse Orman<\/a>, and\u00a0Dean Thomson.<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong>Dean Thomson was also selected as a Top 100 \u201cSuper Lawyer\u201d. For more information click here.<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

Congratulations to the\u00a0Fabyanske, Westra, Hart & Thomson, P.A.\u00a0<\/strong>attorneys who have been named Super Lawyer\u2019s 2025 Minnesota \u201cRising Stars\u201d. <\/strong>They are\u00a0Colin Bruns<\/a>,\u00a0Elise Radaj<\/a>,\u00a0\u00a0Erinn Valine<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Leon Wells.\u00a0<\/a><\/strong>\u201cRising Stars\u201d are nominated by their peers and must be 40 years old or under, or have been practicing for 10 years or less. No more than 2.5 percent of the lawyers in the state are named to the list. For more information click here.<\/a><\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n

Dean Thomson<\/a> <\/strong>was one of eight attorneys in Minnesota selected to be on the Forbes inaugural list of America\u2019s Best-In-State Lawyers<\/a>. <\/strong>This list recognizes top attorneys across all 50 states and U.S. jurisdictions. For more information click here. <\/a>
\n<\/strong><\/p>\n

\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

This discussion is generalized in nature and should not be considered a substitute for professional advice. \u00a9 2025 FWH&T.<\/em><\/h6>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

By Lucas T. Clayton Luke is a shareholder of the firm\u2019s Construction Law Department. He can be reached at 612.359.7628 or LClayton@fwhtlaw.com \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 One of the most important and\u2026<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8,"featured_media":5056,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,7,26],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5441","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-announcements","category-briefing-papers","category-lucas-t-clayton"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nRecovery of Attorney\u2019s Fees Under Indemnity Provisions: The Devil is in the Details - Fabyanske, Westra, Hart & Thomson<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/2025\/08\/15\/recovery-of-attorneys-fees-under-indemnity-provisions-the-devil-is-in-the-details\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Recovery of Attorney\u2019s Fees Under Indemnity Provisions: The Devil is in the Details - Fabyanske, Westra, Hart & Thomson\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"By Lucas T. Clayton Luke is a shareholder of the firm\u2019s Construction Law Department. He can be reached at 612.359.7628 or LClayton@fwhtlaw.com \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 One of the most important and\u2026\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/2025\/08\/15\/recovery-of-attorneys-fees-under-indemnity-provisions-the-devil-is-in-the-details\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Fabyanske, Westra, Hart & Thomson\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-08-15T13:11:41+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-08-18T11:56:41+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/Luke-Clayton-550x275-1.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"550\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"275\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"John Mansir\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"John Mansir\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/2025\/08\/15\/recovery-of-attorneys-fees-under-indemnity-provisions-the-devil-is-in-the-details\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/2025\/08\/15\/recovery-of-attorneys-fees-under-indemnity-provisions-the-devil-is-in-the-details\/\",\"name\":\"Recovery of Attorney\u2019s Fees Under Indemnity Provisions: The Devil is in the Details - Fabyanske, Westra, Hart & Thomson\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2025-08-15T13:11:41+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-08-18T11:56:41+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/6b135c74354fdf14ce071a939f531d92\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/2025\/08\/15\/recovery-of-attorneys-fees-under-indemnity-provisions-the-devil-is-in-the-details\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/2025\/08\/15\/recovery-of-attorneys-fees-under-indemnity-provisions-the-devil-is-in-the-details\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/2025\/08\/15\/recovery-of-attorneys-fees-under-indemnity-provisions-the-devil-is-in-the-details\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Recovery of Attorney\u2019s Fees Under Indemnity Provisions: The Devil is in the Details\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"Fabyanske, Westra, Hart & Thomson\",\"description\":\"Twin Cities Law Firm | Business Attorneys\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/6b135c74354fdf14ce071a939f531d92\",\"name\":\"John Mansir\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/127405e9f8f9272ac5748796e7ddc8013e1b51eb3e9eafeb91c84180a9d11105?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/127405e9f8f9272ac5748796e7ddc8013e1b51eb3e9eafeb91c84180a9d11105?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"John Mansir\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/author\/jmansirfwhtlaw-com\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Recovery of Attorney\u2019s Fees Under Indemnity Provisions: The Devil is in the Details - Fabyanske, Westra, Hart & Thomson","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/2025\/08\/15\/recovery-of-attorneys-fees-under-indemnity-provisions-the-devil-is-in-the-details\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Recovery of Attorney\u2019s Fees Under Indemnity Provisions: The Devil is in the Details - Fabyanske, Westra, Hart & Thomson","og_description":"By Lucas T. Clayton Luke is a shareholder of the firm\u2019s Construction Law Department. He can be reached at 612.359.7628 or LClayton@fwhtlaw.com \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 One of the most important and\u2026","og_url":"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/2025\/08\/15\/recovery-of-attorneys-fees-under-indemnity-provisions-the-devil-is-in-the-details\/","og_site_name":"Fabyanske, Westra, Hart & Thomson","article_published_time":"2025-08-15T13:11:41+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-08-18T11:56:41+00:00","og_image":[{"width":550,"height":275,"url":"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/Luke-Clayton-550x275-1.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"John Mansir","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"John Mansir","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/2025\/08\/15\/recovery-of-attorneys-fees-under-indemnity-provisions-the-devil-is-in-the-details\/","url":"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/2025\/08\/15\/recovery-of-attorneys-fees-under-indemnity-provisions-the-devil-is-in-the-details\/","name":"Recovery of Attorney\u2019s Fees Under Indemnity Provisions: The Devil is in the Details - Fabyanske, Westra, Hart & Thomson","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2025-08-15T13:11:41+00:00","dateModified":"2025-08-18T11:56:41+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/6b135c74354fdf14ce071a939f531d92"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/2025\/08\/15\/recovery-of-attorneys-fees-under-indemnity-provisions-the-devil-is-in-the-details\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/2025\/08\/15\/recovery-of-attorneys-fees-under-indemnity-provisions-the-devil-is-in-the-details\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/2025\/08\/15\/recovery-of-attorneys-fees-under-indemnity-provisions-the-devil-is-in-the-details\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Recovery of Attorney\u2019s Fees Under Indemnity Provisions: The Devil is in the Details"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/","name":"Fabyanske, Westra, Hart & Thomson","description":"Twin Cities Law Firm | Business Attorneys","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/6b135c74354fdf14ce071a939f531d92","name":"John Mansir","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/127405e9f8f9272ac5748796e7ddc8013e1b51eb3e9eafeb91c84180a9d11105?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/127405e9f8f9272ac5748796e7ddc8013e1b51eb3e9eafeb91c84180a9d11105?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"John Mansir"},"url":"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/author\/jmansirfwhtlaw-com\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5441","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5441"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5441\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5450,"href":"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5441\/revisions\/5450"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/5056"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5441"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5441"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fwhtlaw.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5441"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}