Constitutional Challenges to the Partial Rejection and Modification of the Common Law Rule of Joint and Several Liability Made by the 1986 Washington Tort Reform Act

Authors

Cornelius J. Peck, University of Washington School of Law

Abstract

The procedural due process questions raised by Section 401 differ in substantial ways from questions in traditional procedural due process cases. In most of the decided cases a governmental body or a private individual was attempting to harm the interests of the person claiming due process protection. Due process requirements were established as protections for the defendant. Only a few of the cases involved a claim of due process in access to a judicial remedy. Persons contesting the constitutionality of Section 401 will argue that the limitations imposed and the procedures required by that Section fail to meet the requirements of due process for the assertion of a legally recognized claim. Existing case law will, therefore, provide guidance only by analogy for the solution of new problems, and will not directly control resolution of the questions presented. Definite and certain answers or predictions cannot be made. What follows will be a sketch of how constitutional principles may be applied and not a definitive and final disposition of the many arguments which may be anticipated.

First Page

681

Recommended Citation

Cornelius J. Peck, Constitutional Challenges to the Partial Rejection and Modification of the Common Law Rule of Joint and Several Liability Made by the 1986 Washington Tort Reform Act, 62 Wash. L. Rev. 681 (1987).
Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wlr/vol62/iss4/10