[必]我已經讀過且瞭解置底版規、費率、發文必讀公告，並願意遵守規定： * YES ──
──────────────────────────
[必]工 作 量：1224字
[必]工作報酬：1元/字
[必]涉及語言：英譯中
[必]所屬領域：法律
[必]文件類型：法律判例
[必]截 稿 日：20140410 17:00
[必]應徵期限：20140409 24:00
[必]聯絡方式：站內信
[必]付費方式：交稿後立即結清 ────────────────────────
────
[選]工作要求：懂法學英文
[選]試譯文
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.