Firemans Fund Insurance. Co. v. Maryland Casualty Co‪.‬

In this case, we address the question whether the equitable doctrines of contribution and subrogation are entirely distinct and independent concepts, or instead are merely different terms for the same legal principle. Maryland Casualty Company, The Maryland Insurance Company, and Northern Insurance Company of New York (hereinafter collectively referred to as Maryland) appeal from summary judgment entered in favor of Firemans Fund Insurance Company (Firemans Fund) on the latters complaint for contribution and indemnification from Maryland for the costs of defending and settling an underlying lawsuit on behalf of a common insured. Maryland argues that Firemans Funds claims for indemnity and contribution are actually based on its equitable subrogation to the rights of the common insured against Maryland. Because those rights have been settled, released and dismissed with prejudice in previous litigation between Maryland and the insured, Maryland insists there are no longer any remaining rights against Maryland to which Firemans Fund may be subrogated. Therefore, Maryland contends, the trial court erred in granting summary judgment against it on Firemans Fund lawsuit for equitable contribution. We disagree with Maryland, and therefore affirm the judgment in favor of Firemans Fund. Both insurers have also appealed the trial courts allocation of defense and indemnification costs between them. We conclude the trial court did not err in this regard, and therefore affirm the courts equitable allocation.