Helpful Hints
  • (1) You can search the entire content of Dean’s by phrase or by individual words. Just type your keywords into the search box and then pull down the search icon on the right and choose the option you need: search by word or by phrase or reset the content.
  • (2) Double click on a word in the content of a definition, and if the word is listed as a keyword in Dean’s, it will look that word up.
  • (3) You can use the search function to help jump the scrolling function. Simply type the first 2-3 letters into the search box then hit enter on your keyboard and the scroll will go to those Keywords that begin with those letters and allow you to scroll from there.

California law is instructive. Under the common law equitable indemnity doctrine as modified in American Motorcycle Assn. v. Superior Court (1978) 20 Cal.3d 578 [143 Cal.Rptr. 692, 574 P.2d 763], liability among joint tortfeasors may be apportioned on a comparative fault basis. Such apportionment may appropriately be effected between a strictly liable defendant and a negligent defendant, as well as between multiple negligent defendants.

In the recent American Motorcycle decision, after reviewing the origins and development of the common law equitable indemnity doctrine, the court concluded that in light of the principles of Li, [LI V. YELLOW CAB CO. OF CALIFORNIA, 13 Cal. 3d 804, 532 P.2d 1226, 119 Cal. Rptr. 858 (1975)] the all-or-nothing character of the doctrine should be modified to permit partial indemnity among multiple tortfeasors on a comparative fault basis. (20 Cal.3d at pp. 591-599.) The American Motorcycle opinion addressed at some length the question of whether California's present contribution statutes should be interpreted to preclude the evolution of such a common law comparative indemnity doctrine, and concluded that the Legislature did not intend to bar such a common law development. (20 Cal.3d at pp. 599-605.) Thus,

Register or login to access full content