Holmes Regional Medical Center, Inc. v. Allstate Insurance Company
Supreme Court of Florida
1DissentLawson, J.
I dissent because the Court answers the wrong question and because the answer, which effectively leaves the initial tortfea-sor without a remedy, is contrary to the basic tenets underlying common law tort theory. I would rephrase the question to match the facts of this case, to read as follows:
WHEN AN INJURED PARTY SECURES A JUDGMENT AGAINST AN INITIAL TORTFEASOR AND THEN SUES A SUBSEQUENT TORTFEA-SOR TO RECOVER THE SAME DAMAGES, MAY THE INITIAL TORTFEASOR JOIN THE ACTION AND FILE A CONTINGENT EQUITABLE SUBROGATION CLAIM?
I would answer this rephrased question affirmatively. To explain why, I…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Hoffman v. JonesSupreme Court of Florida · 1973
- Fabre v. MarinSupreme Court of Florida · 1993
- Clay Elec. Co-Op., Inc. v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Florida · 2003
- Weinberg v. DingerSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1987
- Jews for Jesus, Inc. v. RappSupreme Court of Florida · 2008
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.