1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. Cal.Rptr.2d
  4. 86 Cal.Rptr.2d
  5. 86 Cal.Rptr.2d 78 (1999)
 

KROLL & TRACK v. PARIS & PARIS

No. G019790.

86 Cal.Rptr.2d 78 (1999)

72 Cal.App.4th 1537

KROLL & TRACT et al., Cross-complainants and Appellants, v. PARIS & PARIS et al., Cross-defendants and Respondents.

Court of Appeals of California, Fourth District, Division Three.

June 24, 1999.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Barton, Klugman & Oetting and Charles J. Schufreider, Los Angeles, for Cross-complainants and Appellants.

Wilner, Klein & Siegel, Edward E. Wallace and Patrick M. Malone, Beverly Hills, for Cross-defendants and Respondents.

OPINION

SILLS, P.J.

Sound policy reasons prohibit an attorney sued for malpractice by a former client from cross-complaining for indemnity against the client's successor attorney. Here, we are asked to decide whether these same concerns should bar an indemnity cross-complaint between two independent attorneys who concurrently represented the dissatisfied client, one as insurance defense counsel and one as Cumis1

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases