In Stuart v. Hertz Corp., 351 So. 2d 703 (Fla. 1977), the Court held that an active tortfeasor in an automobile accident may not bring a third party action for indemnity against a physician for damages directly attributable to malpractice which aggravated the plaintiff's injuries. 351 So. 2d at 704-705. The Court noted that "Florida continues to follow the general rule that where each tortfeasor is chargeable with active or affirmative negligence contributing to the injury for which recovery was had, neither is entitled to indemnity from the other." Id. at 705. The Court thereupon stated that "it follows that the rights of a party to indemnification will be denied where his own wrongful act or omission proximately contributes to the injury complained of." Id. Underlying the Court's ruling is the proposition that "a wrongdoer is liable for the ultimate result, although the mistake or even negligence of the physician who treated the injury may have increased the damage which would otherwise have followed from the original wrong." Id. at 707.