Vandiver & Co. v. Pollak
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from Montgomery Chancery Court. Heard before Hon. John A. Foster. . I. Poliak filed a bill against ~W. F. Yandiver & Co., to enforce contribution.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Montgomery Chancery Court. Heard before Hon. John A. Foster. . I. Poliak filed a bill against ~W. F. Yandiver & Co., to enforce contribution. The defendants assigned as grounds of demurrer that the bill showed that complainant was a joint" trespasser with defendants in the acts for which complainants had been compelled to pay, and also moved to dismiss the bill for want of equity. contended that this case was clearly within the rule that there can be no contribution between joint tort feasors, citing Merriweather v. Nixon, TermR., 186; Spalding v. Dukes, 42 Yt., 343 ; Hunt v. Lam,…
1Opinion of the CourtHead, J.
— It must be received, as the general rule, that no right of contribution exists between joint tort feasors.— See 4 Am. & Eng. Encyc. of Law, 12, and the authorities there collected. The courts, however, have declared numerous exceptions to it; to such extent, indeed, as that the judge delivering the opinion of the court in Goldsborough v. Darst, 9 Brad. (Ill.), 205, saw fit to say that there are so many exceptions to the rule that it has ceased to be a general bne. The appellees insist that the case made by this bill ought to be declared an exception; and that is the question for our…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Moore v. AppletonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1855
- Sparkman v. SwiftSupreme Court of Alabama · 1886
3Cited by7 opinions
- Vandiver & Co. v. PollakSupreme Court of Alabama · 1894
- Mallory S. S. Co. v. DruhanAlabama Court of Appeals · 1920
- Hertzler v. StevensSupreme Court of Alabama · 1898
- Eureka Coal Co. v. Louisville N. R. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1929
- Unicore, Inc. v. Tennessee Valley AuthorityCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1985
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.