Block on Trump's Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
In defendants' action for equitable indemnity against codefendants arising from a real estate transaction involving a failure to disclose existence of an easement, trial court's dismissal of defendants' cross-complaint is reversed as defendants were not precluded from filing a cross-complaint seeking equitable indemnity as it is authorized by the express provisions of Code of Civil Procedure section 428.10(b), as interpreted in American Motorcycle Ass'n. v. Sup. Ct. (1978) 20 Cal.3d 578. Furthermore, the circumstances of this case do not bring it within the limited exception barring the assertion of a cross-complaint where to do so would operate inequitably or in derogation of public policy.
Filed October 7, 2009
Opinion by Judge Ruvolo
For Appellant: Parker & Crosland, David M. Parker and C. Royda Crosland
For Appelle: Livingston Mix, Mary E. Mix, Dennis L. Livingston