FIL ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTHCI RCUI T AUGUST 3, 2010 J OHN L EY CL ERK [DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 0- 10 74 8 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D. C. Dock etNo. 7 :0 9- cv -0 00 94 -SLB
DUNCAN-W ILLIAMS, INC., Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll an t,
ve rs us U.S. BANK NAT IONAL ASSOCIATION, Defen da nt -Ap pe ll ee.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt fo r th e North ernDis tri ctof Al ab am a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ (Au gu st3, 2 01 0) Befo re BLACK, BARKETT an d M ARTIN, Cir cu itJu dg es . PER CURI AM:Dun can -Will ia m s, In c. ap pe al s the di st ric t co urt’s g ran t o f su m m ary jud gm en t i n fa vo r of

U.S. Ban k Nat io na l As so ci at io n (U.S. B an k) inDun can W il li am s’ act io n fo r in de m ni ty or co nt rib ut io n fr om U.S. Ban k. Aft er d e n ov o
rev ie w, we affi rm

th e d is tri ctco urt. See Rio uxv. Cit y o f At la nt a, Ga

. , 52 0 F .3d 12 69 , 12 74 (11 th Cir . 20 08 ) (rev ie win g the di st ric t co urt’s g ran t o f su m m ary jud gm en t d e n ov o)
. I. BACKGROUND On Ap ril 20 , 20 00 , th e Cap st on e Im pr ov em en t Di st ric t (Di st ric t), an in st ru m en ta li ty of th e st at e o f Alabam a, is su ed$1 3 m il li oninbo nd s fo r th e pu rp os e o f de ve lo pi ng a res id en ti al subd iv is io n. Act in g a s anun de rwri te r of th e bo ndis su an ce, Dunc an -Will iam s p ur ch as edha lf o f th e Dis tri ct ’s bo nd s an d re so ld th em to Ru sk in Vest , Indus tri al Pro du ct s, In c., an d Ter i J on es . U.S. Bankserve d
as th e trus te e fo r th e b on dh ol de rs . Beg in ni ng in20 01 , con st ru ct io n o f th e subd iv is io n b eg anto ex pe rie nc e co st
ov erru ns du e to po orm an ag em en t o r ne gl ig en ce o n the pa rt o f th e d ev el op er, wh o
ev en tu al ly refus edto co m pl et e co ns tru ct io n. As a res ul t, the bo nd s d efau lt edin Aug us t o f 20 03
. Ru sk in Vestan d In du st ria l Pr oduc ts fil edanact io n a ga in stDun can W il li am s i n Ten ne ss ee co urt fo r vi ol at io ns of t he Tenn es se e Sec ur it ie s Act , 2ne gl ig en ce, co m m on law fr au d, b reac h o f fi du ci ary du ty, an d v io la ti on of t he Ten ne ss ee Co ns um er Pro te ct io n Act . After t he jury ru le d a ga in stDun can W il li am s, the pa rti es set tl edth e cas e fo r $1 .2 m il li on be fo re jud gm en t was en te red
on th e jury’ s v erd ic t. Teri Jo ne s fi le d s ui t ag ai ns t Du nc an -Will ia m s an d U.S. Ba nkinAlab am a st at e co urt, cl ai min g fr au d i n the is su an ce o f th e b on ds . Dun can -Will iam s s et tl ed th e cas e fo r $1 50 ,00 0. Dun can -Will ia m s the reaf te r fi le d a n a ct io n a ga in stU.S. Ban k, al le gi ng Dun can -Will ia m s was en ti tl edto in de m ni ty andco nt rib ut io n fr om U.S. Ban k fo r th e am ou nt s p ai d i n s et tl em en t. The di st ric t co urt g ran te d s umm ary jud gm en t i n fav orof U.S. Ba nk . The co urt h el d Al ab am a la w go ve rn edDun can -Will ia m s’ cl ai m forin de m

ni ty sin ce s uc h c la im

was b as edon U.S. Ban k’s Tru stInd en tu re, whi chpro vi de d tha t Al ab am a law wou ldco nt ro l an y di sp ut e ari si ng th eref

ro m . Purs ua ntto Alab am a la w, Dun can -Will ia m s wai ve d a ny argu m en t tha t an im pl ie d rig htof i nd em

ni ty aros e fro m

th e in de ntur e b y

set tl in g the un de rlyin g c as es witho utpro vi di ng U.S. Ban k wi th pro pe r no ti ce o f anin te nt io n t o s eekin de m ni ty. The co urt al te rn at iv el y

fou ndth e in de ntur e d idno t cr eat e anim pl ie d ri gh t t o in de m ni ty becau se Alab am a la w gen eral ly doe s n otpro vi de forin de m ni ty or
co nt rib ut io n b etweenjoi ntto rtf eas or s. 3The di stric t co urt al so reject edDun can -Will ia m s’ cla im forco nt rib ut io n. Usi ng Alab am a ch oi ce o f la w pri nc ip le s, the co urt ap pl ie d the law o f th e p la ce o f th e und erl y in g l aws ui t: Tenn es se e la w forth e Ves t ca se an d Al ab am a la w for th e Jo ne s ca se . The co urt d is m is se d Du nc an -Will ia m s’ cla im forco nt rib ut io n fr om th e Jo ne s ca se be cau se , un de r Alaba m a la w, join t t ortfe as or s ar e g en eral ly not
en ti tl edto co ntrib ut io n. Th e co urt al so di sm is se d Du nc an -Will ia m s’ cla im for
co nt rib ut io n u nd er Ten ne ss ee’s Un ifo rm Co nt rib ut io n Am on g To rt- Feas or s Act be cau se th e se tt le m en t i n the Vestcas e d idno t ex ti ng ui sh U.S. Ban k’s p ot en ti al li ab il ity . II. DISCUSS ION Ess en ti al ly, Dun can -Will ia m s co nt en ds th e d is tri ctco urt erredby fail in g t o fin d arig htto co nt rib ut io n o r in de m ni ty aros e fro m

U.S. Ban k’s p art ic ip at io n i n th e co ll ect iv e en te rp ris e o f th e b on d i ss uanc e. The d is tri ctco urt, h owe ve r, di d n ot 1 err b y co nc lu di ng Dun can -Will ia m s i s n oten ti tl edto co nt rib ut io n o r in de m ni ty
un de r ei th er Al ab am a la w or Ten ne ss ee l aw. 2

Dunca n-Will iams asserts a

g enuine issue of

materia l fac t exi sts as to whether U .S. Bank 1 is joint ly and seve rally

liable due to the a ffidavits of John S . J umper a nd Dunca n F. Williams. For the purposes of

this opini on, we will assume without dec iding that Dunc an-Williams created a material issue of fa ct on joint and sever al liability
. Dunca n-Will iams contends Te nnessee law should apply to both underlying c ases. As 2 explained below, howeve r, Dunc an-Williams’ claims fail under both Te nnessee law and Alabama law. 4Und er Al ab am a la w, gen eral ly “ th ere i s n o ri gh t t o i nd em ni ty or
co nt rib ut io n b etweenjoi ntto rtf eas or s.” So uthT

ru st Ban k v. Jo nes, Mo rr is on , W oma ck &Dear in g, P.C. , 93 9 S o. 2 d 8 85 , 89 9 (Al a. Ci v. Ap p. 2 00 5) . An
ex cep ti on is m ad e o nl y

wher e a p arty

is li ab le be cau se of p as si ve ne gl ig en ce, “ i.e., li ab il ity th atth e la w im

po se s o n o ne pa rty for the wron gf ul co nduc t o f an ot he r.” Na ti on wi de Mut . Ins . Co. v. Ha ll , 64 3 S o. 2 d 5 51 , 55 6 (Al a. 19 94 ). Tenn es se e ap pl ie s s im il ar ru le s wi th res pe ctto in de m ni fic at io n. Se e Owen s v. Tr uc ks to ps of Am. , 91 5 S .W .2d42 0, 4 33 (Ten n. 1 99 6) (ho ld in g a n o bl ig at io n t o i nd em ni fy m ay ari se by im

pl ic at io n “ whe re o ne pa rty is h el d l iabl e so le ly by im pu tati on of l aw be cau se of arel at io n t o awron gd oe r”). Inth e und erl y in g l it ig at io n, Du nc an W il li am s was su edfor

it s o wn ac ti on s ra th er tha n the wron gf ul co nduc t o f U.S. Ban k. Th e d is tri ctco urt the refo re d idno t err by dis mis si ng Dun can -Will ia m s’ cl ai m s fo r co nt rib ut io n a ndin de m ni ty bas edon th e Jo ne s ca se an d i nd em ni ty ba se d o n the Vestcas e. Init s co m pl ai nt , Dun can -Will ia m s as se rte d acla im forco nt rib ut io n b as ed
so le ly on the Uni fo rm

Co nt rib ut io n Am on g To rt- Feas or s Act . Tenn . Cod e Ann
. § 2 9- 11 -1 01 to -10 6 (2 01 0) . Sect io n 1 02 (d ) pr ov id es : “ A to rt- feas or who en te rs in to a se tt le m en t wi th a cl ai m an t i s n oten ti tl edto reco ve r co nt rib ut io n fr om
an ot he r to rt- feas orwho se li ab il ity forth e in jury or wro ng fu l d eath i s n ot
5ex ti ng ui sh edby the set tl em en t . . . .” The d is tri ctco urt d idno t err by dis m is si ng

Dun can -Will ia m s’ con tri bu ti oncla im ba se d o n the Vestcas e b ecau se Dun can W il li am s h as fai le d t o a ll eg e o r pr ov e it s s et tl em en t i n the Vestcas e ex ti ng ui sh ed U.S. Ban k’s l iabi li ty. III. CONCLUSION The di stric t co urt d idno t err by gran ti ng su m m ary jud gm en t ag ai ns t Dun can -Will ia m s o n i ts cla im s fo r in de m ni ty andco nt rib ut io n. Du nc an -Will ia m s is no t en ti tl edto co ntrib ut io n o r in de m ni ty und er Al ab am a la w or i nd em ni ty und er Ten ne ss ee l aw be cau se it s l iabi li ty w as no t s ol el y im pu te d b y law fr om it s rel at io ns hi p wi th U.S. Ban k. Mo reo ve r, Dun can -Will ia m s h as fai le d t o m eetth e requi rem en ts forob ta in in g c on tri bu ti on fou ndinTenn es se e’s Uni fo rm Co nt rib ut io n Am on g To rt- Feas or s Act . Accor di ng ly, we affi rm . AFFIRMED.

6