Mississippi Code

Miss. Code Ann. § 85-5-5 (2026)

[Repealed]

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaMiss. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Repealed by Laws, 1989, ch. 311, § 6, eff. 7/1/1989.

Codes, 1942, § 335.5; Laws, 1952, ch. 259.


Notes of Decisions
Cited in 22 cases, 1974–2006 · leading case: Dawson v. Townsend & Sons, Inc., 735 So. 2d 1131 (Miss. Ct. App. 1999).
Dawson v. Townsend & Sons, Inc., 735 So. 2d 1131 (Miss. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 13× “" Miss.Code Ann. § 85-5-5 (1972), repealed 1989 Miss.”
Celotex Corp. v. Campbell Roof. & Met. Works, Inc., 352 So. 2d 1316 (Miss. 1977). · cites it 6× “However, in England the exception to the rule was abolished in 1935 by the Law Reform (married women and tortfeasors) Act which provides that a tort-feasor may recover contribution from any other tort-feasor who is, or would, if sued, have been liable in respect of the same…”
Nw. Airlines, Inc. v. Transp. Workers Union, 451 U.S. 77 (1981). “1980-1981); Miss. Code Ann. §85-5-5 (1972); Mo. Rev. Stat.”
R & S Dev., Inc. v. Wilson, 534 So. 2d 1008 (Miss. 1988). · cites it 2× “See Miss. Code Ann., § 85-5-5 (1972). Conversely, there is the rule that uncertainty as to the amount, and arguably as to the allocation of damages will not preclude the plaintiff's right to recover.”
Moore v. Missouri Pac. R.R., 773 S.W.2d 78 (Ark. 1989). · cites it 2× “[3] Miss.Code Ann. § 85-5-5 (1972); N.J.Stat.”
Hood v. Dealers Transp. Co., 472 F. Supp. 250 (N.D. Miss. 1979). · cites it 5× “It is apparent that Section 85-5-5 does not change the rule long established in Mississippi that there is no contribution between joint tortfeasors, except for such cases as may come within the purview of the statute.”
Est. of Hunter v. Gen. Motors Corp., 729 So. 2d 1264 (Miss. 1999). “However, a closer reading of § 85-5-7 indicates that the Legislature did not intend to alter the old law set forth in § 85-5-5 (repealed) which provided for no contribution absent a joint judgment.”
Kriz v. Buckeye Petroleum Co., Inc., 701 P.2d 1182 (Ariz. 1985). “1985); Miss.Code Ann. § 85-5-5 (1972); Nev.Rev.Stat.”
Alabama Great S. R.R. Co. v. Allied Chem. Corp., Armco Steel Corp., & Gen. Am. Transp. Corp., 501 F.2d 94 (5th Cir. 1974). · cites it 2× “If the passive negligence concept of implied indemnity is to be extended to encompass the greater-lesser negligence concept advanced by AGS, and accepted in the trial court's instructions to the jury, the result could conflict with Mississippi statutory scheme of contribution…”
Wilson v. Giordano Ins. Agency, Inc., 475 So. 2d 414 (Miss. 1985). · cites it 2× “Mississippi has been one of the leaders in recognizing the doctrine of comparative fault.”
Robles v. Gollott & Sons Transfer & Storage, Inc., 697 So. 2d 383 (Miss. 1997). “See: MCA § 85-5-5 (repealed). The legislature recently passed MCA § 85-5-7, and this statute, as opposed to § 85-5-1, is controlling in the instance of contribution among joint tortfeasors.”
Garriga v. Nationwide Mut. Ins., 813 F. Supp. 457 (S.D. Miss. 1993). · cites it 2× “Section 85-5-5 (1972 and 1988 Supp.) (repealed by laws 1989, ch.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.