## Facts

- Zoila Godoy suffered severe hand injuries, including loss of four fingers, while using a manually fed commercial meat grinder.
- The grinder moved through the distribution chain: Taiwanese manufacturer (Aroma Taiwan Machinery Co.) → importer/distributor (Carfel, Inc.) → wholesaler (Abamaster of Miami, Inc.) → retailer (Mike’s Restaurant Equipment Corp.) → plaintiff.
- Carfel imported the grinder into the United States and sold it to Abamaster without removing it from its carton.
- Abamaster sold the grinder in its sealed carton to the retailer, which sold it to the plaintiff.
- The manufacturer was not subject to personal jurisdiction in New York.

## Issues

1. Whether a downstream distributor held strictly liable for a defective product may obtain common-law indemnification from an upstream importer/distributor closer to the manufacturer, notwithstanding that both are strictly liable to the injured plaintiff.

## Decision

- The Appellate Division, Second Department reversed the order denying Abamaster’s indemnification claim against Carfel.
- The court held Abamaster, as an “innocent conduit” in the distribution chain, was entitled to full common-law indemnification from Carfel.
- The court rejected the trial court’s view that apportionment of liability between Abamaster and Carfel rendered them equal joint tortfeasors limited to contribution.

## Legal Principles

- Common-law indemnification is available where the indemnitee’s liability is vicarious or derivative and the indemnitor is in a superior position to prevent the harm or to allocate the risk.
- In strict products liability, sellers at different points in the chain are not necessarily equally situated for purposes of shifting loss among defendants.
- A downstream distributor that did not contribute to the defect and acted only as a conduit may obtain indemnification from an upstream importer/distributor closer to the manufacturer, which is better positioned to influence product safety and obtain contractual recourse.

## Conclusion

The court held that strict-liability defendants in a distribution chain may shift the entire loss through common-law indemnification based on their relative roles, allowing a downstream distributor that merely passed along a sealed product to recover full indemnity from an upstream importer closer to the manufacturer.


Godoy v. Abamaster of Miami, Inc., 302 A.D.2d 57, 754 N.Y.S.2d 301 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep’t 2003)