In Bridgestone Firestone N. America Tire., L.L.C. v. A.P.S. Rent-A-Car & Leasing, Inc., 207 Ariz. 502, 88 P.3d 572 (App. 2004), the plaintiffs in an underlying products liability action sued a car rental company for negligence and for strict products liability arising out of a van roll-over caused by a tire failure. Id. at 503, P1, 88 P.3d at 573. The rental company admitted the tire was defective and unreasonably dangerous and the superior court directed a verdict in the plaintiffs' favor on the strict products liability claim. Id. at 504, P5, 88 P.3d at 574. The jury awarded substantial damages to the plaintiffs and essentially allocated 70% of the verdict to the rental company based on the rental company's negligence and 30% on the product-liability claim. Id. at P6, 88 P.3d at 574. The plaintiffs' negligence claim against the rental company, and the 70% of fault allocated by the jury on that claim, arose from the rental company's failure to inspect the tire, or to warn the renters of a prior accident involving a virtually identical tire on the same vehicle, or to replace the other tires after the prior accident. Bridgestone, 207 Ariz. at 504 n.3, P6, 88 P.3d at 574 n.3. Subsequently, the rental company sued the manufacturer for indemnity under A.R.S. 12-684(A). Id. at 504-05, PP8, 9, 88 P.3d at 574-75. The Court held the rental company was entitled to indemnification under the statute for the 30% allocated by the jury on the strict products liability claim. Id. at 505, P9, 88 P.3d at 575.