Torts — Indemnity — Action by plaintiff who was injured when she became entrapped in an elevator in office building against building owner and elevator maintenance company, with building owner filing cross-claim against elevator maintenance company for contractual and common law indemnity — Trial court erred in finding that building owner abandoned its cross-claim by failing to amend it after plaintiff amended complaint to inject new issues of non-delegable duty and negligent response — Building owner’s secret settlement agreement with plaintiff was not a prohibited Mary Carter agreement where payment of settlement was made during damages phase of case after liability had been established during liability phase of bifurcated trial, so that there was no incentive to decrease building owner’s liability or increase maintenance company’s liability, and trial court erred in denying indemnity on basis that agreement was a prohibited Mary Carter agreement — Trial court’s determination that building owner could not seek indemnity because its settlement with plaintiff was voluntary was premature — Remand for further proceedings on cross-claim for indemnity
43 Fla. L. Weekly D1103a
The materials available at this website are for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact your attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Use of and access to this Website or any of the e-mail links contained within the site do not create an attorney-client relationship between Abbey, Adams, Byelick & Mueller, L.L.P. and the user or browser. The opinions expressed at or through this site are the opinions of the individual author and may not reflect the opinions of the firm or any individual attorney.
opens in a new windowAbbey, Adams, Byelick, & Mueller XML Sitemap Index