Corrigan

City of Watsonville v. Corrigan

Good Law
149 Cal. App. 4th 1542·58 Cal. Rptr. 3d 458
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 18, 2007H030054California4,150 words

Opinion

Opinion

Elia, J.

This appeal arises out of a cross-action by the City of Watsonville (City) against respondents Patrick T. and Jill Corrigan and Michael Tansy, who were partners in developing and marketing residential properties in Watsonville. The trial court ruled that respondents had no duty to reimburse the City for the costs and fees it had incurred in defending the underlying action, because the City had failed to tender its defense to respondents. On appeal, the City contends that tender was not a prerequisite for reimbursement under the parties’ indemnity agreement, under statutory and case law, and under the circumstances presented in this case. We agree that the contract, construed in accordance with Civil Code section 2778, did not require tender, and we therefore must reverse the judgment.

Background

In early 2003 and 2004 three sets of plaintiffs sued multiple defendants, including respondents and the City, for damages related to soil instability and landslides on the property they had bought from respondents or other defendants. The causes of action against the City contained allegations of negligent maintenance of its property, nuisance, and inverse condemnation. The City…

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.