75 Misc. 2d 256 - Sage v. Hale’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 district · 15 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Apparently the General Assembly intended to change the common law; otherwise, there would have been no reason to enact the statute. The legislative mandate in R.C. 2307.32 abrogates the common law rule which provided that a release given to one tortfeasor was a release of all others and often entrapped the average person into reasonably assuming that settling a claim with one person would have no effect upon rights against others with whom he did not deal. (Citation omitted.) Instead, R.C. 2307.32 provides that a release to one tortfeasor does not discharge any other tortfeasor “unless its terms otherwise provide.” The thrust of this section is to retain the liability of tortfeasors and, thus, the phrase “unless the terms otherwise provide” should be narrowly construed and require a degree of specificity. Allowing a discharge which does not name or identify a tortfeasor perpetrates the common law rule and is contrary to statute. The statutory phrase “unless its terms provide otherwise” requires a release to expressly designate by name or to otherwise specifically describe or identify any tortfeasor to be discharged. For example, a release could meet the statutory requirement by naming an individual or specifically identifying a tortfeasor such as stating the driver of the car which struck the motorcycle.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Moore v. Missouri Pacific Railroad

2. “[a]s a matter of law, the broad language of the release in the present case, interspersed with additional verbiage on a printed form, does not satisfy the statutory requirement.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 101 Ill. 2d 196 - Alsup v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.

3. “unless [the release] terms expressly so provide.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Neves v. Potter