Lindgren v. Baker Engineering Corp.

I dissent. There are cases supporting the majority’s holding (Fenley v. Kristoffersen (1979) 94 Cal.App.3d 139 [156 Cal.Rptr. 187]; Dow v. Britt (1974) 37 Cal.App.3d 868 [112 Cal.Rptr. 710]; Heves v. Kershaw (1961) 198 Cal.App.2d 340 [17 Cal.Rptr. 837]), but they are wrong. The premise is, “The intent of these sections [Veh. Code, §§ 17150 and 17151] is to make it clear that as between the operator and the owner, the primary liability is that of the operator and the liability of the owner is secondary. The owner’s liability is like that of a guarantor as to the [$15,000] joint liability of…