The Case for Comparative Contribution in Florida

Authors

W. Cort Frohlich
Donald L. Gibson

Abstract

This article examines the recently enacted Uniform Contribution Among Tortfeasors Act in Florida. After briefly discussing the common law doctrine of no contribution and efforts to alleviate such a harsh rule, the authors focus on the serious conflicts between the new statute and the underlying equitable principles of Hoffman v. Jones. In particular, the pro rata sharing of liability, the settlement, and the release provisions of the statute are criticized as not allocating the ultimate liability of the tortfeasors based on their relative degrees of fault. The authors suggest that a legislative change regarding these provisions is warranted so as to maintain a consistent and equitable apportionment system for everyone.

Recommended Citation

W. Cort Frohlich and Donald L. Gibson, The Case for Comparative Contribution in Florida, 30 U. Mia. L. Rev. 713 (1976)
Available at: https://repository.law.miami.edu/umlr/vol30/iss3/6