 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Gerrard v. Craig9/8/1992
at 301. This holding, noted the court, was also consistent with the Legislature's intent behind the 1981 tort reform act. Smith, 106 Wash. 2d at 303. The legislative history of the bill discussing the requirements to receive contribution revealed the following intent:
and within one year both paid the claimant and commenced this action for contribution.
(Italics omitted.) Smith, 106 Wash. 2d at 303 (quoting Senate Journal, 47th Legislature (1981), at 636).
When the Supreme Court decided Smith, however, RCW 4.22.070 was not effective. Accordingly, Lawson argues that Smith is no longer authoritative. We disagree. For so long as there is the potential for joint and several liability, as there is in this case, we hold that Smith is still good authority, notwithstanding the enactment of the 1986 tort reform act.
IV
We reverse the trial court's summary dismissal "with prejudice" of the appellants' claim for contribution and the trial court's denial of appellants' motion to set aside that portion of the summary judgment order of September 20, 1989, which dismissed the cross claim "with prejudice". We remand for a resolution of appellants' claim for contribution pursuant to RCW 4.22.040, .050 and .060.
Disposition
Holding that the owner and driver of the first car had not waived their right to appeal the dismissal of their cross claim and that the driver of the second car potentially was jointly and severally liable with the owner and driver of the first car, the court reverses that portion of the summary judgment dismissing the cross claim and remands the case for further proceedings.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Washington Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|