[必]我已经读过且了解置底版规、费率、发文必读公告，并愿意遵守规定： * YES ──
──────────────────────────
[必]工 作 量：1224字
[必]工作报酬：1元/字
[必]涉及语言：英译中
[必]所属领域：法律
[必]文件类型：法律判例
[必]截 稿 日：20140410 17:00
[必]应征期限：20140409 24:00
[必]联络方式：站内信
[必]付费方式：交稿后立即结清 ────────────────────────
────
[选]工作要求：懂法学英文
[选]试译文
4. California's contribution statutes do not preclude this court from
adopting comparative partial indemnity as a modification of the common law
equitable indemnity doctrine.
[8] None of the parties to the instant proceeding, and none of the numerous
amici who have filed briefs, seriously takes issue with our conclusion that a
rule of comparative partial indemnity is more consistent with the principles
underlying Li than the prior “all-or-nothing” indemnity doctrine.