Commonwealth, Department of Highways v. Cardwell
Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976)
1Dissent
DISSENTING OPINION
STEWART, Judge.
I am unable to agree with the holding in the majority opinion.
The primary issue raised is whether the release executed by each appellee is a defense available to appellant as a joint tortfeasor where it is shown by extraneous evidence, as was done in this case, that such was not the intention of the parties to the release.
Until recently the Court of Appeals has followed the so-called “modern view” in answering this question, as distinguished from the “common law view.” Necessarily the decisions regarding the subject have reflected different factual situations.…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Louisville Gas & Electric Co. v. BeaucondCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1920
- Louisville & Evansville Mail Co. v. Barnes' Admr.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1904
- Daniel v. TurnerCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1959
- Kingins v. HurtCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1961
- Miller's Adm'x v. PicardCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1945
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.