Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-00717/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-00717-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 110
Nature of Suit: Insurance
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Insurance Contract

---

U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

 The Court also notes that Zurich may be considered a joint tortfeasor under § 877.6 in light of

the bad faith allegations of the complaint. St. Paul contends that the nature of plaintiffs’ bad faith claim

is such that any defendant’s tort liability is separate, and represented that if plaintiffs prevailed on the

bad faith claim St. Paul would not seek contribution or indemnity from Zurich as to the bad faith claim.

Thus, a faith determination under § 877.6 will not prejudice St. Paul as to the bad faith claim. 

U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOCELYN JONES and JOHN JONES,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

ST PAUL TRAVELERS, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

No. C 06-0717 SI

ORDER GRANTING ZURICH’S

MOTION FOR GOOD FAITH

DETERMINATION OF SETTLEMENT

On November 3, 2006, the Court heard oral argument on the motion by defendant Zurich

American Insurance Company (“Zurich”) for a good faith determination of settlement. Having

considered the papers submitted by the parties and arguments of counsel, the Court GRANTS

defendant’s motion.

Based on the unique circumstances and facts of this case, the Court finds that Section 877.6 of

the California Code of Civil Procedure is applicable to Zurich’s settlement with plaintiffs. Under the

Integrated Risk Policy, each defendant had a contractual obligation to provide its proportionate share

of excess liability coverage. St. Paul acknowledged at oral argument that if plaintiffs prevailed in this

action, it might seek indemnification from Zurich based on the Integrated Risk Policy. Accordingly, the

Court concludes Zurich is a co-obligor on the Integrated Risk Policy, and thus that Section 877.6 applies.

The Court further finds that the settlement was in good faith. See Tech-Built, Inc. v. Woodward-Clyde

& Associates, 38 Cal. 3d 488, 499 (1985).1

Case 3:06-cv-00717-SI Document 87 Filed 11/08/06 Page 1 of 2
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS defendant’s motion for a good faith determination

of settlement and orders, pursuant to Section 877.6(c), that defendants in this action are barred from

pursuing any past, present, or future claims against Zurich, for contribution or indemnity under any

theory, arising out of the events that are the subject of this action. (Docket No. 64).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 8, 2006 

SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:06-cv-00717-SI Document 87 Filed 11/08/06 Page 2 of 2