Court Opinion

ID: 9768675
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 13:43:19.575925+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:30:43.060695
License: Public Domain

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
The Heil Company, in its Motion for Partial Rehearing, complains of this court’s af-firmance of the verdict instructed in favor of Vernon Grant. The Heil Company asserts error in the holding that it could not recover contribution from Vernon Grant even if he were negligent towards Decedent. We have reviewed the law regarding contribution and indemnity and remain convinced of the correctness of our judgment.
Article 2212, Tex.Rev.Civ.Stat. Ann., permits enforced contribution among joint tortfeasors who are in pari delicto, but does not abrogate the common law rule as to the rights of wrongdoers who are not in pari delicto. Austin Road Co. v. Pope, supra. When joint tortfeasors are not equally guilty, although both are liable to a third person, as between themselves the blameless should be allowed indemnity. Austin Road Co. v. Pope, supra. Joint tortfeasors are not in pari delicto when the injury resulted from a violation of the duty one owes the other. Austin Road Co. v. Pope, supra.
Even if Vernon Grant were negligent in permitting Decedent to work beneath the raised bed without a brace, the death resulted, at least in part, from the defective design of the hoist mechanism. This defective design constituted a breach of the Heil Company’s duty to both Vernon Grant and Decedent. Thus, as between the joint tort-feasors, Vernon Grant would have been entitled to indemnity from the Heil Company and would not have been liable to the Heil Company for contribution.
The Motion is respectfully overruled.