About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


33 Okla. L. Rev. 203 (1980)
Contribution among Tortfeasors: The Effects of Statutes of Limitations and Other Time Limitations

handle is hein.journals/oklrv33 and id is 205 raw text is: OKLAHOMA LAW REVIEW VOLUME 33 SPRING, 1980 NUMBER 2 CONTRIBUTION AMONG TORTFEASORS: THE EFFECTS OF STATUTES OF LIMITATIONS AND OTHER TIME LIMITATIONS PETER B KUTNER* Contribution among tortfeasors is now established by statute in most American states and territories and throughout the other major common law nations (the United Kingdom, Ireland, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand).' Contribution has been established by judicial decisions in a number of American states and territories.2 The draftsmen of the early statutes and judicial opinions could not have foreseen, let alone provided for, many of the questions that would arise in the course of contribution litigation. Some contribution statutes provided little more than that whenever two or more persons @1980 Peter B Kutner *Associate Professor of Law, University of Oklahoma College of Law-Ed. I See statutes listed in Appendix, infra. The law of Scotland is substantially the same as the law of common law jurisdictions in relevant aspects and is, consequently, within the scope of this article. The civil law jurisdictions of Louisiana, Puerto Rico, and Quebec provide for contribution but are outside the scope of this article. I LA. CiV. CODE ANN. arts. 2103-2105 (West 1977); LA. Civ. CODE ANN. art. 2324 (West 1971); Quatray v. Wicker, 178 La. 289, 151 So. 208 (1933); P.R. LAws ANN. tit. 31 §§ 3109-3110 (1968); Garcia v. Government of Capital, 72 D.P.R. 138, 72 P.R.R. 133 (1951); QUE. CIVIL CODE arts 1117-1118 (19-). See Montreal v. The King, [1949] Can. S.Ct. 670, [1949] 4 D.L.R. 1. It should be noted that under their civil codes, the injured victim's institution of suit against one tortfeasor interrupts prescription of the vic- tim's causes of action against other joint tortfeasors. Therefore, if the victim sues one tortfeasor before the victim's claim against a joint tortfeasor becomes prescribed, it is less likely than in a common law jurisdiction that the victim's claim against the joint tortfeasor will be time-barred at the time contribution is claimed from that tortfeasor. See Gray v. Hartford Accident & In- dem. Co., 36 F. Supp. 780 (,V.D. La. 1941); Circle Food Stores, Inc. v. Gabriel, 331 So. 2d 57 (La. App. 1976); Garcia v. Government of Capital, 72 D.P.R. 138, 72 P.R.R. 133, 142 (1951); J. WILLIAMS, LIMITATIONS OF AcTIONS IN CANADA 81-82 (1972) [hereinafter cited as J. WILLIAMS]; Weir, Complex Liabilities, in 11 INTERNATIONAL ENCYCLOPEDIA OF COMPARATIVE LAW ch. 12, §§ 95-96, 123 (1976). Compare Lapierre v. City of Montreal, [1959] Can. S.Ct. 434 (1959), with Martel v. Hotel-Dieu St. Vallier, [1969] Can. S.Ct. 745, 14 D.L.R.3d 445 (1969). 2 See cases listed in Appendix, infra. Today, fewer than ten states have no contribution among tortfeasors.