Jack and Drew,
I am not certain that you inderstand the concept of J&S liability. The advantage of being in a state that has not abolished J&S, is that the Plaintiff, here the LL, may PURSUE only ONE Def.(Tenant), and that Def will have to pay for ALL damages. The Def-T then has the burden of collecting from the OTHER-T. This relieves the LL from having to pursue the other T.
If it got to court and you only pursue one, that one could point the finger at the other and the result could be iffy
J&S prevents that very scenario you have used, Jack.
Many states have abolished J&S liability. You may read about it here. http://www.atra.org/show/7345
North Ca., has NOT abolished it, to the best of my knowledge. When you have 2 tenants on the lease, in a state that has not abolished J&S., you may pursue ONE/BOTH, and they are BOTH liable for the FULL amount of the judgment. (This does NOT mean the LL receives DOUBLE recovery) However, it is prudent to pursue BOTH D's, in case one is insolvent