Is a plaintiff's service of a complaint sufficient to trigger the accrual of a defendant's equitable indemnity claim?

To begin with, we ordinarily will not invoke legislative history to justify interpreting a statute contrary to its plain language. ( Shirk v. Vista Unified School Dist. (2007) 42 Cal.4th 201, 215, 64 Cal.Rptr.3d 210, 164 P.3d 630.) As noted previously, section 901 provides that a defendant's equitable indemnity action accrues with the service of a complaint giving rise to the defendant's claim for equitable indemnity, not upon the service of the original complaint in the action. Further, none of the passages from the legislative history that the City quotes suggests that the plaintiff's service of a complaint triggers the accrual of a defendant's equitable indemnity claim premised on a claim that is not pled in the complaint, as the City's interpretation of section 901 would require. In addition, numerous other

[214 Cal.App.4th 1107]