Tort Law: Case Analysis

555 Words2 Pages
Can you elect to recover your damages from the resort only, even though Tex and Rex were primarily responsible for your injuries? In this particular circumstance, the independent actions of Tex and Rex concurred with the actions of the resort they worked for to cause my injuries, which makes both parties concurrent tortfeasors. As stated in our textbook, "under the rule of joint and several liability, each defendant can be held responsible for the entire harm or any designated portion of the harm," and this provision of tort law stipulates that "a plaintiff may recover from one or all of the joint tortfeasors" (Edwards, Edwards & Wells, 2011, p. 446). This provision would become important if Tex and Rex were found to be financially indigent, and thus unable to fully pay any damages ordered, because I would then elect to recover damages from the more financially capable resort only. Can the resort then turn around and seek reimbursement from Tex and Rex? If the resort is found only to vicariously liable as the principal, with Tex and Rex acting as the resort's agents, but was forced to pay more than its pro rata share of damages, the resort would retain its entitlement to contribution, or partial reimbursement, from the other defendants. The process of contribution assures that "tortfeasor A may turn to B and C for partial reimbursement because he paid more than his pro rata share of damages" (Edwards, Edwards & Wells, 2011, p. 454), which is especially applicable
Open Document