Regional Steel Corp. v. Superior Court

Good Law
1994 Cal. App. LEXIS 557·25 Cal. App. 4th 525·32 Cal. Rptr. 2d 417·32 Cal. Rptr. 417·94 Daily Journal DAR 7600
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 5, 1994D020509California1,189 words

Opinion

Opinion

Work, J.

Regional Steel Corporation (Regional) petitions for a writ of mandate after the court denied its motion for summary judgment in this action arising from injuries to an ironworker. Regional, a subcontractor, was named in a cross-complaint for equitable indemnity, comparative contribution and declaratory relief by the general contractor after the ironworker sued the general contractor. Regional contends it was entitled to summary judgment because principles of equitable or comparative indemnity are inapplicable when parties have an express indemnity agreement. We agree and grant the petition.

Factual and Procedural Background

McCarthy Western Constructors, Inc. (McCarthy) was the general contractor in a project to build a science building on the University of California, San Diego campus. Under a subcontract with McCarthy dated April 24, 1991, Regional agreed to supply and install reinforcing bar in the project. The “Insurance and Indemnity” section of the subcontract originally provided in part: “5.6 To the fullest extent permitted by law, Subcontractor agrees to indemnify and hold harmless McCarthy, the Owner, the Architect and all of their agents, officers and…

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.