Nutrition Now, Inc. v. Superior Court

Good Law
105 Cal. App. 4th 209·129 Cal. Rptr. 2d 266·2003 Cal. App. LEXIS 29·2003 Daily Journal DAR 313·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 276
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 9, 2003B160942California1,449 words

Opinion

Opinion

Vogel, J.

David Goldstein sued Nutrition Now, Inc., in Connecticut to recover for injuries allegedly caused by nutritional supplement capsules marketed by Nutrition Now. Nutrition Now settled with Goldstein for $1.4 million, then came to California and filed this equitable indemnity and contribution action against Cappseals, Inc. Cappseals cross-complained against Nutrition Now for indemnity, and Nutrition Now then filed a motion for a determination that its Connecticut settlement with Goldstein was made in good faith. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 877, 877.6.) Cappseals opposed the motion, contending a California court could not determine whether the Connecticut settlement was made in good faith. The trial court said the settlement was “too remote” and denied the motion without reaching its merits. We reach a different result in this writ proceeding, finding nothing in the statutory scheme or its raisons d’etre to limit section 877.6 to settlements reached in California lawsuits.

Discussion

A.

Subdivision (a) of section 875 provides: “Where a money judgment has been rendered jointly against two or more defendants in a tort action there shall be a right of contribution among them” as…

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.