July 28, 2005 - General Liability Update - July 2005
COMMONWEALTH COURT STRIKES DOWN JOINT AND SEVERAL LIABILITY LAW
In a disappointing turn of events for defendants, the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court has struck down The Fair Share Act (Act 57), finding it unconstitutional and void in the case of DeWeese v. Weaver (Pa. Commw. July 26, 2005). The Commonwealth Court granted a Motion For Summary Judgment in favor of petitioner H. William DeWeese, the House Minority Leader and Member of The House Rules Committee. The Act was signed into law in June 2002, and in August 2002 a Petition For Review was filed in the Commonwealth Court seeking declaratory and injunctive relief, asking that the Act be struck down as unconsitutional.
The Petition for Review and ultimate ruling were based upon Article III of the Pennsylvania Constitution, particularly section 3, which provides that "no bill shall be passed containing more than one subject . . ." Act 57 began as Senate Bill 1079, which was an Act to establish DNA testing of certain felony offenders and create a statewide DNA databank. As the bill moved through various stages, provisions regarding joint and several liability were grafted upon the bill. The petitioners argued that DNA and joint/several liability were two different purposes and sufficiently diverse as to make the Act unconstitutional under Article III Section 3. The Court agreed with the petitioners, finding that the two purposes were not 'germane' to one another and did not 'bear a proper legislative relation' to one another.
This case came to the Commonwealth Court under their original jurisdiction pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S.A. 761(a)(1) and (2). Accordingly, we believe that this decision constitutes precedent toward the courts of common pleas across the Commonwealth. As a result, the Fair Share Act and its 60 percent joint and several liability rule (for the time being) are void. At the moment, the "old" rules of joint and several liability would appear to be back in effect. Thus, a defendant found 1 percent liable could be held to pay the entire verdict.
It is likely that the ruling will be appealed to the Supreme Court. In that case, there is also a significant potential that a number of organizations may weigh in with amicus briefs. There is also the potential that the Supreme Court could issue an Order staying the Commonwealth Court ruling pending a full Supreme Court review.
- Andrew K. Worek