قالب وردپرس درنا توس
Home / Insurance / Subcontractor lacks position to object to death settlement

Subcontractor lacks position to object to death settlement



A subcontractor who opposed a summary judgment to a general contractor and settlement with the family of a worker killed at a workplace could not show that it had the right to oppose the court's judgment, a court of appeal ruled. [19659002] In Atlas Construction Supply Inc. v. Swinerton Builders the California District of Appeals, Fourth District, Division One in San Diego, on Tuesday dismissed the subcontractor's appeal in its cross-examination of the general contractor, who had also been sued for wrongful death. of the family of the deceased worker.

Marcelo Develasco Sr., who worked for a subcontractor on a construction site supervised by main contractor Swinerton Builders, was killed when a concrete column formed on him. His family filed a false death claim against Swinerton and the mold supplier Atlas Construction Supply Inc. Atlas in turn filed a complaint against Swinerton for compensation, allowance and fair exemption.

A court issued a summary judgment to Swinerton, who in a settlement with the family agreed to waive his costs if the family agreed to dismiss his case. Swinerton requested, and was granted, a determination in good faith that would prevent Atlas' complaint against it.

Atlas, who is still responding to the family's underlying wrongful death, appealed the verdict. The court argued that the court would have denied Swinerton's request for a summary judgment and that the construction company would never have decided the case if the court had considered the justification of the Atlas card. Atlas said it was estimated that the family's recovery at the trial would amount to about $ 2.7 million and that Swinerton could be held responsible for at least part of it and therefore the decision on good faith settlement would be denied. rejected Atlas' appeal . It concluded that Atlas failed to make substantive legal arguments specific to the decision of the Court of Justice. Although the court concluded that Atlas was not allowed to appeal the decision in good faith, it considered that Atlas had no right to appeal to the summary court in favor of Swinerton. Catalog

Catalog


Source link