Bailey

Bailey v. Reliance Insurance

Good Law
2000 Cal. App. LEXIS 229·2000 Daily Journal DAR 3271·79 Cal. App. 4th 449·94 Cal. Rptr. 2d 149·65 Cal. Comp. Cases 375
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 28, 2000B130799California3,516 words

Opinion

Opinion

Curry, J.

Appellants Stephen S. and Jeannette Bailey settled a personal injury action with the driver of a car who injured Mr. Bailey and with the driver’s employer. Respondent Reliance Insurance Company (Reliance), the workers’ compensation carrier for Mr. Bailey’s employer, brought a motion under Code of Civil Procedure section 877.6 for a finding that the settlement was in bad faith. The Baileys appeal from the order granting the motion on the ground that Code of Civil Procedure section 877.6 does not apply where no one is seeking a determination that the settlement was in good faith and where the party contesting the motion is not a joint tortfeasor in the action or joint obligor on a contract with the settling party. We conclude that Code of Civil Procedure section 877.6 does not apply in this situation and reverse the trial court’s order.

Background

On March 6, 1997, Mr. Bailey instituted a lawsuit for injuries sustained in an automobile collision in which his vehicle was rear-ended by a vehicle driven by Miguel Angel Barajas and owned by Barajas’s employer, Pacific Coast Roofing/Pacific Coast Weatherproofing. Named as defendants were Barajas, Pacific Coast Roofing, Pacific…

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.