HOLDINGS: [1]-The trial court erred in denying a general liability insurer’s claim for equitable subrogation, which alleged that subcontractors had breached their contractual duty to defend the general contractor in construction defect actions related to their work, because equitable subrogation would not be unfair in that it would shift only each subcontractor’s equitable share of the defense costs rather than the entire amount and the failure to defend the general contractor caused the insurer to incur the costs; [2]-A remand was appropriate for the trial court to determine what portion of the defense costs each subcontractor should pay because the equitable nature of the subrogation claim meant that the subcontractors had no right to a jury trial, even though the insurer sought monetary damages; moreover, allocating costs was within the trial court’s discretion in the first instance.

Nakase Law Firm provides wrongful termination attorney free consultation


Reversed and remanded.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *