Curry

Curry v. SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN BERNARDINO CTY.

Good Law
1993 Cal. App. LEXIS 1161·20 Cal. App. 4th 180·24 Cal. Rptr. 2d 495·93 Daily Journal DAR 14723·93 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8601
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 18, 1993E012847California3,796 words

Opinion

Opinion

Acting, J.

In this matter we are called upon to decide whether a tortfeasor seeking partial equitable indemnity may claim the benefit of Civil Code section 1714.1 , which imposes financial responsibility upon the parents of an errant minor. We hold that the statute’s provisions do run in favor of the third party tortfeasor, and are not limited to the injured party. We therefore conclude that the trial court correctly overruled petitioners’ demurrer to real party’s cause of action seeking equitable indemnity based on that statute.

The facts and procedural history of the case may be briefly summarized. A complaint was filed by Latashia Washington in which she alleged that she was sexually molested by cross-defendant David Curry, a minor. At the time of the alleged molestation, Ms. Washington—confined to a wheelchair due to cerebral palsy—was a student at Eisenhower High School, operated by petitioner Rialto Unified School District. The complaint sought damages primarily on the theory that the district, through its defendant employees Gayle Rellstab and Edna Herring, failed to control David Curry and failed to protect plaintiff from him.

Plaintiff did not name David Curry or any…

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.