Twin City Fire Ins. Co. v. Auto Zone Parts CA4/2

I.

INTRODUCTION

AutoZone Parts, Inc. sold the wrong truck axle to a customer, whose grandson

suffered serious injuries in an accident in the truck about two months later. The grandson

sued AutoZone, Dorman Parts, Inc., and others. Dorman and AutoZone responded by

filing cross-complaints against one another and other defendants. After a trial on the

issue of liability, a jury found AutoZone and Dorman each 50 percent liable for the

customer’s injuries. During post-trial proceedings, Dorman’s insurer, Twin City Fire

Insurance Co., substituted in for Dorman. The trial court then granted AutoZone’s

motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) on Dorman’s cross-complaint,

finding that Dorman failed to prove causation. After entering judgment for AutoZone,

the trial court dismissed AutoZone’s cross-complaint without prejudice.

Twin City appealed, and AutoZone filed a protective cross-appeal. We affirm the

judgment and the order dismissing AutoZone’s cross-complaint without prejudice. We

therefore dismiss AutoZone’s cross-appeal as moot.

II.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Dylan Donnelly’s grandfather took his truck in for repairs and the mechanic,

Jeremy…