Joint And Several Liability · Jurisdiction Comparison
A detailed comparison of how Washington and Oregon handle joint and several liability in tort cases, including their approaches, key cases, and practical implications.
In Washington, joint and several liability applies in cases involving multiple defendants found to have caused a single indivisible harm. Under RCW 4.22.070, if multiple parties are liable for damages, a plaintiff can collect the full damages from any one of the defendants, although a defendant that pays more than its share may seek contribution from co-defendants. However, Washington has adopted a 'comparative fault' system where liability is apportioned based on the percentage of fault assigned to each defendant, meaning that a plaintiff's recovery may be reduced if they are found to be partially at fault.
Oregon has restructured its approach with the enactment of the 1981 Tort Claims Act, which established a modified version of joint and several liability. Under ORS 31.605, a defendant's liability for noneconomic damages is limited to their percentage of fault, effectively eliminating joint and several liability for such damages. However, for economic damages, joint and several liability can apply if a defendant's fault exceeds a set threshold, thus allowing for broader recovery options for plaintiffs depending on the nature of the damages claimed.
This case affirmed that plaintiffs can recover the full amount of damages from any one defendant in a joint and several liability situation.
This case helped define the limitations of joint and several liability in Oregon, particularly in addressing the thresholds for fault allocation.
Lawyers must meticulously assess the fault of each defendant in both states when preparing for litigation. Understanding the distinctions between economic and noneconomic damage liabilities is crucial, particularly in Oregon, where the limits significantly affect potential recovery for clients.
Questions on joint and several liability in bar exams may test knowledge of the comparative fault principles and distinctions in recovery options between states, particularly in practical application scenarios.