Defended a lawyer against a Writ of Mandate that arose from client’s cross complaint for equitable indemnity against petitioners.  The court overruled petitioners’ demurrer, and the Court of Appeal granted an alternative writ.  The issue in the appellate court was whether a lawyer who has been sued by a former client for professional negligence can seek equitable indemnity from a lawyer who subsequently represented the client in the same underlying proceeding, but not in the legal malpractice action.   The Court of Appeal, in a matter of first impression, held that public policy barred equitable indemnity under these circumstances. 

Skip to content