60-2413. Contribution between joint obligors. (a) Generally. Persons jointly liable to another in contract are entitled to contribution among themselves as heretofore recognized by principles of equity. Such right of contribution may be asserted in separate actions or by way of cross-claim, interpleader, or intervention under the provisions of article 2.
(b) Judgment debtors. A right of contribution or indemnity among judgment debtors, arising out of the payment of the judgment by one or more of them, may be enforced by execution against the property of the judgment debtor from whom contribution or indemnity is sought.
History: L. 1963, ch. 303, 60-2413; January 1, 1964.
Source or prior law:
(b). G.S. 1868, ch. 80, § 480; L. 1909, ch. 182, § 474; R.S. 1923, 60-3437.
Revisor's Note:
This revision of former G.S. 1949, 60-3437 may exclude joint tort liability (see Fort Scott v. Railroad Co., 66 K. 610, 611, 72 P. 288).
Cross References to Related Sections:
Suit against copartners or joint obligors, 16-104.
Release of persons jointly or severally liable, 16-105.
Law Review and Bar Journal References:
Malpractice actions against physicians after original tort-feasor released, Donald Barry, 3 W.L.J. 75, 84, 86 (1963).
History of section discussed including application of subsection (b) where joint judgment is rendered in an action founded on tort, Peggy Gatewood, 10 W.L.J. 135, 136, 137, 138 (1970).
Contribution rights between joint tortfeasors discussed in survey of Kansas tort law, 21 K.L.R. 117, 131 (1972).
"Comparative Negligence Update—A Discussion of Selected Issues," Donald W. Vasos, 44 J.B.A.K. 13, 16, 17 (1975).
Comparative negligence and damage apportionment, 16 W.L.J. 672, 674 (1977).
"The Ultimate Burden of the Federal Estate Tax in Kansas—A Dilemma for Executors," Austin Nothern and John H. Wachter, 17 W.L.J. 231, 260 (1978).
"Torts: Damage Apportionment Under the Kansas Comparative Negligence Statute—The Unjoined Tortfeasor," Philip R. Carson, 17 W.L.J. 698, 699 (1978).
"Brown and Miles: At Last, An End to Ambiguity in the Kansas Law of Comparative Negligence," Hal D. Meltzer, 27 K.L.R. 111, 129 (1978).
"Comparative Fault and Strict Products Liability in Kansas: Reflections on the Distinction Between Initial Liability and Ultimate Loss Allocation," William Edward Westerbeke and Hal D. Meltzer, 28 K.L.R. 25 (1979).
"Survey of Kansas Law: Torts," William Edward Westerbeke, 33 K.L.R. 1, 31 (1984).
"A Review of the Kansas Comparative Fault Act," James D. Griffin and Chris Reitz, 63 J.K.B.A. No. 5, 26, 31 (1994).
"Survey of Kansas Tort Law: Part I," William E. Westerbeke and Stephen R. McAllister, 49 K.L.R. 1037 (2001).
CASE ANNOTATIONS
Prior law cases, see G.S. 1949, 60-3437.
1. Held to have no relation to the Kansas workmen's compensation act. Bituminous Casualty Corporation v. American Fire & Casualty Co., 192 Kan. 233, 236, 387 P.2d 159.
2. Where joint judgment is rendered in an action founded upon tort, contribution between joint judgment debtors is authorized by subsection (b); prior law and history of section discussed. McKinney, Administrator v. Miller, 204 Kan. 436, 438, 439, 440, 441, 442, 464 P.2d 276.
3. Remedy between joint judgment debtors concurrently at fault is in contribution under subsection (b). Lenhart v. Owens, 211 Kan. 534, 538, 507 P.2d 318.
4. Applied; no evidence of common or joint liability on note. Cipra v. Seeger, 215 Kan. 951, 952, 529 P.2d 130.
5. Question of contribution between joint debtors not presented to trial court not considered on appeal. Hays v. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co., 225 Kan. 205, 210, 589 P.2d 579.
6. No contribution is available or required between joint judgment debtors in comparative negligence cases. Kennedy v. City of Sawyer, 4 Kan. App. 2d 545, 554, 608 P.2d 1379. Reversed: 228 Kan. 439, 618 P.2d 788.
7. Action for contribution on note was not timely filed by comaker; payment of note by comaker discharges all parties. Litwin v. Barrier, 6 Kan. App. 2d 128, 129, 626 P.2d 1232.
8. Considered in action involving joinder of additional parties pursuant to K.S.A. 60-258a. Ellis v. Union Pacific R.R. Co., 231 Kan. 182, 185, 186, 643 P.2d 158 (1982).
9. Cited in holding accommodation party paying note has rights of surety with five-year period to recover. Lindsey v. Zeller, 10 Kan. App. 2d 4, 6, 690 P.2d 394 (1984).
10. Subsection (b) not applicable to intentional tort-feasors; does not apply if judgment has been obtained. Gray v. City of Kansas City, Kan., 603 F. Supp. 872, 876 (1985).
11. Cited; appearance of impropriety examined where guarantor's counsel associated with lawyers who executed personal guaranties identical to guarantor's. Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Frazier, 637 F. Supp. 77, 79 (1986).
12. Cited; applicability of statute prior to enactment of K.S.A. 60-258a examined. Mathis v. TG&Y, 242 Kan. 789, 791, 751 P.2d 136 (1988).
13. Assignee with passive interests in oil and gas leases as nonliable for contribution to joint obligors examined. Waltrip v. Sidwell Oil & Gas, Inc., 245 Kan. 55, 65, 774 P.2d 948 (1989).
14. Noted in holding that Article 13 of the probate code provides no relief to surviving comakers of decedents. Farmers State Bank of Ingalls v. Friesen, 15 Kan. App. 2d 132, 136, 803 P.2d 1049 (1991).
15. When agent and his principals jointly enter into contract, agent may assert right of contribution from principals upon breach. Wandrey v. McCarthy, 804 F. Supp. 1384, 1385, 1387 (1992).
16. Defendants' contribution allegations against third-party defendants were mature claims. Raytheon Aircraft Cred. Corp. v. Pal Air Intern., 923 F. Supp. 1408, 1418 (1996).
17. Insurer does not have right to statutory contribution from agent. U.S. Fidelity and Guar. Co. v. Sulco, 939 F. Supp. 820, 823 (1996).
|
|