|
Abstract: One of the more vexing intellectual problems in tort law arises from accidents that have multiple causes. While the modern common law generally denied one tortfeasor the right to contribution from a joint tortfeasor, with certain exceptions, most states have abrogated the no-contribution rule by statute. Formulas for determining the apportionment of damages among the joint tortfeasors varies widely. This article criticizes Mario Rizzo and Frank Arnold’s attempt to justify these methods of contribution. Their approach to contribution does not successfully implement the economic principles it is said to embody and is defective. Instead, the article suggests, if contribution is appropriate in joint causation cases, simpler administrative rules are preferable.
|