Skip to main content

Jones v. Hurst

Citations

  • 459 A.2d 219
  • 54 Md. App. 607
  • 1983 Md. App. LEXIS 283

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • involving an express denial of liability coupled with language in the release stating that the settling defendant would be considered a joint tort-feasor “to the same extent and effect as if judgments had been rendered against them (sic
  • involving an express denial of liability coupled with language in the release stating that the settling defendant would be considered a joint tort-feasor “to the same extent and effect as if judgments had been rendered against them (sic) as joint tort-feasors (sic).”
  • release included language that settling defendant was considered to be a joint tortfeasor “as if judgments had been rendered against” it
  • “Under the [UCATA], certain consequences ensue when an injured person releases one of several joint tort-feasors. One of those consequences may be a reduction in any judgment the injured party recovers against remaining tort-feasor(s).”
  • formally holding what had previously been suggested by dicta

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Wilner, Garrity, Adkins

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

18 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.