Hairston v. Allen
153 A.3d 999
Pa. Super. Ct.2016Background
- On Oct. 4, 2009, Hairston was stabbed during a scuffle at a bar owned by Allen/Grabs, Inc.; Hairston sued Miller (assault/intentional tort) and Allen/Grabs (negligence).
- Complaint did not plead joint-and-several liability or explicitly label defendants joint tortfeasors.
- Case went to compulsory arbitration (award ≤ $50,000). On Jan. 26, 2015, arbitrators awarded $40,000 total and apportioned liability: Miller 85% ($34,000), Allen 15% ($6,000).
- No party appealed the arbitration award within the 30-day period; the prothonotary docketed the apportioned award and later entered judgment on the award as apportioned.
- Hairston filed a praecipe seeking judgment against both defendants for $40,000; Allen sought an order to compel amendment of the praecipe claiming the award was apportioned and he was liable only for his share.
- Trial court denied Allen’s petition; the superior court affirmed but clarified that any execution against Allen is limited to his apportioned $6,000 share.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether an unap-pealed compulsory-arbitration award that apportions damages between an intentional tortfeasor and a negligent tortfeasor is enforceable as apportioned | Hairston: judgment may be entered and executed as filed; prothonotary entered judgment | Allen: award apportioned him 15%; he is liable only for his share; arbitration decision was final and binding | The apportioned arbitration award was final and enforceable; judgment must be enforced according to apportioned shares |
| Whether the trial court could revisit apportionment after the arbitration appeal period lapsed | Hairston: court could allow execution against either defendant for full amount (trial court relied on pre-amendment statute) | Allen: court lacked authority to reallocate after appeal period; only remedy was appeal within 30 days | Court lacked authority to revisit apportionment after the appeal period; the arbitrators’ apportionment stands |
| Whether the Comparative Negligence Act (42 Pa.C.S. § 7102) required joint-and-several liability here | Hairston: statute permits recovery from any defendant for full amount under earlier law | Allen: § 7102 applies only to negligence actions and does not defeat an apportioned award where one defendant is intentional tortfeasor | § 7102 applies only to negligence claims; here one defendant was intentional tortfeasor, so the Act does not mandate joint-and-several liability in this case |
Key Cases Cited
- Conner v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., 820 A.2d 1266 (Pa. Super. 2003) (arbitrators function as judges of law and fact; award final unless appealed)
- Capone v. Donovan, 480 A.2d 1249 (Pa. Super. 1984) (whether harm is apportionable is question of law for the trier)
- Glomb v. Glomb, 530 A.2d 1362 (Pa. Super. 1987) (apportionment permitted where reasonable basis exists; injured party bears risk of nonpayment by other tortfeasor)
- Voyles v. Corwin, 441 A.2d 381 (Pa. Super. 1982) (once apportionment decision is made, trier of fact allocates fault)
- Keller v. Re/Max Centre Realty, 719 A.2d 369 (Pa. Super. 1998) (execution on writ limited to the amount apportioned to that defendant)
- McMeekin v. Harry M. Stevens, Inc., 530 A.2d 462 (Pa. Super. 1987) (§ 7102 applies only to actions founded in negligence)