Opinion ID: 2329826
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Sun Cab stated a claim for contribution

Text: Sun Cab's third-party contribution claim alleged that LaTourette exacerbated Zinni's injuries by negligently mistreating him after the car accident. Thus, by alleging that Sun Cab and LaTourette were joint tortfeasors in this regard, Sun Cab sufficiently pleaded a claim for contribution against LaTourette. A right to contribution exists where two or more persons become jointly or severally liable in tort for the same injury to [a] person... even though judgment has not been recovered against all or any of them. NRS 17.225(1). LaTourette, however, relies upon NRS 17.225(2), which states that a right to contribution exists only in favor of a tortfeasor who has paid more than his or her equitable share of the common liability. (Emphasis added.) In other words, LaTourette contends that because Sun Cab had not yet paid Zinni more than its fair share of liability, the contribution claim was premature and should have been dismissed. We find this reasoning to be unpersuasive, as it squarely contradicts Nevada's Rules of Civil Procedure and several prior decisions of this court. To begin, NRCP 14(a) provides that a third-party plaintiff may implead a third-party defendant based on an inchoate claim for contribution. [1] Specifically, NRCP 14(a) allows a third-party plaintiff to implead a third-party defendant who is or may be liable to the third-party plaintiff for all or part of the plaintiffs claim at any time after [the] commencement of the action. Under the federal analogue to NRCP 14(a), the phrase may be liable is meant to specifically provide for the possibility of joining a third-party defendant against whom a cause of action has not yet accrued. 6 Charles Alan Wright, Arthur R. Miller & Mary Kay Kane, Federal Practice and Procedure § 1451 (2010). Moreover, we have repeatedly recognized that a third-party plaintiff has the right to seek contribution in an original action prior to entry of judgment. See, e.g., Rodriguez, 125 Nev. at 583, 216 P.3d at 797 (defendants asserted prejudgment claims for contribution or indemnity in the original action); ANSE, Inc. v. Dist. Ct., 124 Nev. 862, 868-69, 192 P.3d 738, 742-43 (2008) (noting that a third-party plaintiff could seek contribution from a third-party defendant in the original action prior to entry of judgment); We have also interpreted NRS 17.285 as setting forth two methods for enforcing a claim of contribution: either by a separate action following entry of judgment or  in the same action in which [the] judgment is entered against two or more tortfeasors. Bell & Gossett Co. v. Oak Grove Investors, 108 Nev. 958, 963, 843 P.2d 351, 354 (1992) (emphasis added); see NRS 17.285(1), (2). Because this matter falls within the latter method, Sun Cab's claim for contribution was timely. Accordingly, we conclude that Sun Cab's third-party claim for contribution was not premature, and thus, LaTourette's argument in this regard cannot serve as an alternative basis for affirming the district court's dismissal order.