Burlington Northern Railroad v. Superior Court

Good Law
137 Cal. App. 3d 942·187 Cal. Rptr. 376·1982 Cal. App. LEXIS 2187
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 3, 1982A018202California1,450 words

Opinion

Opinion

Newsom, J.

Petitioner Burlington Northern Railroad Company is the defendant below in a personal injury action brought by lames R. Noyes, a Burlington employee who was injured while off-duty but in the course of his employment. Petitioner seeks a peremptory writ of mandate or prohibition directing the court below to vacate its decision finding the settlement between Burlington and Noyes was not made in good faith. We grant the writ.

A perusal of the record below discloses that Noyes received a grievous, paralyzing injury when the door of a refrigeration car owned by Burlington and manufactured by real party Paccar, Inc. fell on him. Noyes and Burlington arrived at a sliding scale agreement whereby Burlington guaranteed that Noyes would receive $2 million at the end of all litigation. Paccar did not settle. When Noyes and Burlington sought a finding by the trial court that the settlement was in good faith, Paccar challenged it. The trial court agreed with Paccar and found the settlement was not made in good faith because it both ignored equitable apportionment and failed to promote settlement of litigation.

By the terms of the settlement, Noyes would continue to prosecute his case…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.