A major legislative objective in abolishing joint and several liability is premised on the theory that each party’s responsibility should depend on its so-called degree of fault. However, this object is fatally flawed both practically and socially because it will place the burden of immune, absent or insolvent tortfeasors on the consumer-victim and the commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The unquestionable added financial burden that this change in the law would have upon an overly taxed state health care system cannot be overlooked.
The factual and legal dilemma created by an apportionment statute is that it assumes the reliability of allocating percentages of fault comparing the mistakes committed by multiple parties. In fact, what has happened across the country is that defendants with large coffers hire the best attorneys to defend them, deflect responsibility to those with limited resources and avoid paying for the harm caused.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
