West Virginia Code
W. Va. Code § 55-7-13 (2026)
Repealed. Acts, 2015 Reg. Sess., Ch. 59
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WV-LEGwvlegislature.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
ARTICLE 7. ACTIONS FOR INJURIES.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 33
cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1966–2023 · leading case: Charleston Area Med. Ctr., Inc. v. Parke-Davis, 614 S.E.2d 15 (W. Va. 2005).
Charleston Area Med. Ctr., Inc. v. Parke-Davis, 614 S.E.2d 15 (W. Va. 2005). “2d 216, 218 (1975) (applying W.Va.Code § 55-7-13 and holding that “[ujnder West Virginia law there is no right of contribution between joint tort-fea-sors in the absence of a joint judgment”), ovemded by Haynes v.”
Bd. of Educ. v. Zando, Martin & Milstead, Inc., 390 S.E.2d 796 (W. Va. 1990). “We termed this an “inchoate right to contribution” in order to distinguish it from the statutory right of contribution after a joint judgment conferred by W.Va.Code, 55-7-13 (1923). 2 161 W.Va. at 234 , 240 S.”
Sitzes v. Anchor Motor Freight, Inc., 289 S.E.2d 679 (W. Va. 1982). “Oddly enough where the action was ex contractu, the common law had no difficulty in fixing a right of contribution where one party to a breached contract paid more than his share of the common obligation.”
Lacy v. CSX Transp., Inc., 520 S.E.2d 418 (W. Va. 1999). “While such an outcome is perhaps a plausible inference given the unique familial relationship of these parties, there was nothing in evidence that otherwise directly supported such a contention. CSX's argument was, in any event, misleading to the extent that it implied that…”
Woodrum v. Johnson, 559 S.E.2d 908 (W. Va. 2001). “2001) ("Where a judgment is rendered in an action ex delicto against several persons jointly, and satisfaction of such judgment is made by any one or more of such persons, the others shall be liable to contribution to the same extent as if the judgment were upon an action ex…”
Nw. Airlines, Inc. v. Transp. Workers Union, 451 U.S. 77 (1981). “Comp. Laws Ann. §§15-8-11 to 15-8-22 (1967); Tex.”
State Ex Rel. Leung v. Sanders, 584 S.E.2d 203 (W. Va. 2003). “This is termed an `inchoate right to contribution' in order to distinguish it from the statutory right of contribution after a joint judgment conferred by W. Va.Code, 55-7-13 (1923)." "`The touchstone of the right of inchoate contribution is this inquiry: Did the party against…”
Bradley v. Appalachian Power Co., 256 S.E.2d 879 (W. Va. 1979). “Under W. Va. Code, 55-7-13, joint tortfeasors may still obtain contribution after judgment.”
Kimberly Landis & Alva Nelson v. Hearthmark, LLC, 750 S.E.2d 280 (W. Va. 2013). “This “statutory right” of contribution was conferred by W.Va. Code § 55-7-13 [1923], which provided: Where a judgment is rendered in an action ex delicto against several persons jointly, and satisfaction of a judgment is made by any one or more of such persons, the other shall…”
Savage v. Booth, 468 S.E.2d 318 (W. Va. 1996). “To permit a plaintiff to raise this issue in cases like the one at bar merely serves to give the plaintiff an amount of money greater than what the jury determined was necessary for complete satisfaction for the wrong suffered.”
Howell v. Luckey, 518 S.E.2d 873 (W. Va. 1999). “This “statutory right of contribution” was conferred by W.Va.Code § 55-7-13 (1923), which provided: ‘Where a judgment is rendered in an action ex delicto against several persons jointly, and satisfaction of a judgment is made by any one or more of such persons, the other shall…”
Shantigar Found. v. Bear Mountain Builders, 804 N.E.2d 324 (Mass. 2004). “2003); W. Va. Code Ann. § 55-7-13 . See also Nelson v.”
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.