Legal Question in Construction Law in California

Re: Damaged equiptment

The "collateral source rule" governs this situation. A defendant may not introduce evidence at trial that the plaintiff has received compensation from sources outside the case, such as relatives, charities, public assistance or, yes, insurance companies.

Thus, it is irrelevant whether the surveyor had insurance. You can't bring it up at trial.

Incidentally, the surveyor is probably not required to carry insurance on his equipment.

For more information, there is a good discussion of the collateral source rule in Wikipedia.

Re: Damaged equiptment

Whether he has insurance is legally irrelevant to whether you owe him for the equipment. Regardless of whether he has insurance, you can still be held liable for his damages and be forced to pay him provided you are legally at fault for damaging his equipment.