Adams v. Cerritos Trucking Co.

California Court of Appeal Apr 17, 1978 No. Civ. 50078Published

Before: Roth

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that while joint tortfeasors remain jointly and severally liable to a plaintiff, they may obtain partial indemnity from each other based on comparative fault. Consequently, a judgment for partial indemnity in favor of one tortfeasor against another must be conditioned upon the former's payment of its own proportionate share of the plaintiff's judgment.

Issues

Whether the doctrine of comparative negligence limits the liability of joint tortfeasors to the degree of comparative fault established by the judgment.
Whether a joint tortfeasor may be required to pay a judgment to another joint tortfeasor who has not yet paid its own pro rata share of the plaintiff's judgment.

Disposition. Affirmed in part; vacated and remanded in part.

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Accordingly, we hold that under the common law equitable indemnity doctrine a concurrent tortfeasor may obtain partial indemnity from cotortfeasors on a comparative fault basis.”

[959]

Opinion

ROTH, P. J.

Plaintiff Adams recovered a jury verdict of $35,000 against defendants Cerritos Trucking Company, Inc. (Cerritos), Ronald Fredericksen,

and their codefendant Deborah Thompson. Judgment was entered thereon against all defendants. Cerritos cross-complained in the same action against Thompson for property damage.

The jury i having determined the percentage liability of Adams and defendants, the trial judge apparently by stipulation of the parties concurrently found in favor of Cerritos on its cross-complaint for property damage in the sum of $7,413.62 against Thompson and apportioned said amount on the basis of the percentage of fault of each as manifested by the judgment of Adams against all defendants and held that Thompson was required to pay to Cerritos 15 percent thereof, to wit: $1,112.04. Thompson is appellant on this appeal. Adams and Cerritos are the respondents.

The judgment at bench predicated on the jury verdict was entered on December 10, 1975. As pertinent to the questions raised on this appeal, it is as follows:

“We further find that plaintiff’s William A. Adams, conduct contributed 0% to the happening of the accident sued upon herein.

“We further find that cross-complainant, Cerritos Trucking Company Inc., conduct contributed 85% to the happening of the accident sued upon herein.

“The court finds that the cross-complainant, Cerritos Trucking Company, Inc., has been damaged in the sum of $7413.62, said sum to be reduced by 85%.”

Thompson contends that: (1) the rule established by

Yellow Cab Co.

(1975) 13 Cal.3d 804 [119 Cal.Rptr. 858, 532 P.2d 1226, 78 A.L.R.3d

[960]

Adams v. Cerritos Trucking Co.

AI Brief

ROTH, P. J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief