Legal Opinion · Dissent

Chodos v. Cole

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 25, 2012No. B236361Published

1Dissent

TURNER, P. J., Dissenting.

I. INTRODUCTION

I would affirm. The record does not comply with requirements imposed in Supreme Court authority. And in my view the gravamen of the equitable indemnity cross-complaint are written and oral statements made in the course of litigation; all of these written and oral statements are subject to the litigation privilege; and as to one set of cross-defendants, equitable indemnity in the legal malpractice context is unavailable. I would dismiss the appeal from the amount of the attorney fee award entered in favor of cross-defendants, Michael D. Dempsey, Stephen…

2Cases cited41 opinions

  1. Navellier v. SlettenCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
  2. Ketchum v. MosesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
  3. Oasis West Realty v. GoldmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 2011
  4. Briggs v. Eden Council for Hope & OpportunityCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
  5. City of Cotati v. CashmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002

36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API