Peiffer v. Allstate Ins. Co., 109
| Decision Date | 02 June 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. 109,109 |
| Parties | James P. PEIFFER, Appellant, v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE CO., Respondent. |
| Court | Wisconsin Supreme Court |
The plaintiff-appellant, Jerome Peiffer, seeks recovery for personal injuries sustained in an accident that occurred on October 31, 1967, at the intersection of state highways 32 and 144 in the town of Holland in Sheboygan county.
The highway accident involved two motor vehicles: one driven by Anna Peiffer and insured by Allstate Insurance Company, the second driven by Violet Treichel and insured by American Family Mutual Insurance Company.
On November 20, 1968, the plaintiff-appellant received $10,000, the limit of coverage under the policy, from American Family Insurance Company, and the following release was executed by plaintiff-appellant:
'FOR THE SOLE CONSIDERATION OF Ten-thousand and No/100 DOLLARS ($10,000.00), the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, I/we hereby fully and forever release and discharge Herbert And Violet Treichel and the American Family Mutual Insurance Co. of Madison, Wisconsin, their heirs, administrators, executors, successors and assigns from all claims, demands, damages, actions, rights of action of whatever kind or nature which I/we now have or may hereafter have arising out of, in consequence of or on account of all injuries to person, including any latent injuries and all developments and results therefrom, known and unknown injuries, whether developed or undeveloped, and anticipated and unanticipated consequences of all such injuries, and damages to property resulting to me/us in any way from an accident which occurred on or about the 31st day of October, 1967, at or near the Intersection of State Highway 32 and 144 in the twp. of Holland, Sheboygan County, Wisconsin. In accepting said sum I/we hereby release and discharge that fraction, portion or percentage of the total cause of action of claim for damages I/we now have or may hereafter possess against all parties responsible for my/our damages which shall by trial or other disposition, be determined to be the sum of the fractions, portions or percentages of causal negligence for which the parties herein released are found to be liable to me/us as a consequence of the above accident.
'I/We hereby accept said sum as a compromise and settlement of all claims on account of the dispute between the parties hereto as to whether the above named parties are liable to me/us or not, and also as to the nature, extent and permanency of the injuries sustained by me/us.
'I/We agree that in making this release, I/we am/are relying on my/our own judgment, belief and knowledge as to all phases of my/our claims and that I/we am/are not relying on representations or statements made by any of the persons hereby released or anyone representing them or physicians or surgeons employed by them.
'I/We agree that the payment of the above sum is not to be construed as an admission of any liability whatsoever by or on behalf of the above named parties, by whom liability is expressly denied.
'I/We further agree that any claim of whatever kind or nature the above named parties might have or hereafter have growing out of the above accident, is hereby expressly reserved to them.
'This release is intended to release only the parties specifically named. The undersigned expressly reserve the balance of the whole cause of action or any other claim of whatever kind or nature not released hereby which I/we may have or hereafter have against any other person or persons arising out of the above accident.
'As a further consideration, we the undersigned, agree to indemnify said parties released and save them harmless from any claims for contribution made by others so adjudged jointly liable with said parties released, and the undersigned agrees to satisfy any judgment which may be rendered in favor of the undersigned, satisfying such fraction, portion or percentage of the judgment as the causal negligence of the parties released is adjudged to be of all causal negligence of all adjudged tort-feasors. In the event the undersigned fails to immediately satisfy any such judgment to the extent of the fraction, portion or percentage of the negligence as found against the parties released, the undersigned hereby consents and agrees that upon filing a copy of this agreement, without further notice, an order may be entered by the court in which said judgment is entered directing the Clerk thereof to satisfy said judgment to the extent of such fraction, portion or percentage of the negligence as found against the parties released and discharged under this release.
'The undersigned does hereby specifically reserve any rights he might have against Anita Peiffer and Allstate Insurance Company and any of the above printed form in conflict with this reservation of rights is null and void.
'Signed and Sealed at Rt. 1, Belgium, Wisconsin, this 20th day of November 1968.
'In Presence of: CAUTION: READ BEFORE SIGNING
'Milton E. Paske Jerome P. Peiffer (SEAL)
'Wm. Fiedler _ _ (SEAL)'
On February 14, 1969, plaintiff-appellant commenced the present action against Allstate to recover damages incurred as a result of the highway accident. Defendant Allstate, answered denying negligence on the part of its insured. As a further defense Allstate alleged that, as a result of the release, if its insured, Anita Peiffer, were found causally negligent and if such negligence were found to be greater than that of appellant, its liability would be only for the unsatisfied portion of the total damages as is represented by the percentage of its insured's causal negligence but not to exceed its policy limits.
The case was presented to the trial court on an agreed statement of facts, the parties agreeing that they sought a determination of insurance coverage afforded by the defendant, Allstate, as affected by the settlement made between American Family and plaintiff, as evidenced by the release above set forth.
On May 21, 1970, the trial court held that the defendant-respondent, Allstate, was liable only for the percentage of negligence attributable to its insured driver. From the judgment, plaintiff appeals.
O'Meara & O'Meara, West Bend, for appellant.
Fulton Menn & Nehs, Appleton, for respondent. Peter S. Nelson, Appleton, of counsel.
Analysis of the impact of the partial settlement and release upon the rights and liabilities of the parties litigant begins with the Bielski Case, 1 where this court held that, in the establishment of contribution rights between joint tort-feasors, damages were to be ratably allocated in proportion to the percentage of causal negligence attributable to each joint tort-feasor. Before Bielski, the percentage of liability of each joint tort-feasor was as a matter of law equal in proportion to the number of joint tort-feasors. 2 A release of one of several joint tort-feasors satisfied a definite percentage of the cause of action, and, while the plaintiff in a personal injury action could bring suit against a nonsettling tort-feasor, he was limited in recovery to that portion of the action that had not been settled. 3 Accordingly, there was no right to contribution against the tort-feasor who had been released from liability, nor could such settling party be made a party defendant in the action. 4
In light of Bielski, the question arose whether it would be feasible to effect a settlement of claim with fewer than all of alleged multiple joint tort-feasors. Would the defendants who settled the claim against them and secured a release of such claim be protected from further liability under Bielski for contribution claims from nonsettling joint tort-feasors? Could such settling defendants still be named as defendants in lawsuits brought against those defendants who had not settled?
In the Pierringer Case, 5 this court answered these questions, laying to rest any apprehension that Bielski would operate as a roadblock to the partial settlement of personal injury claims against multiple defendants by less than all of them. In that case it was made clear that:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Alumax Mill Products, Inc. v. Congress Financial Corp.
...be dismissed from further participation in the trial. Frey v. Snelgrove, 269 N.W.2d at 922; see Peiffer v. Allstate Insurance Co., 51 Wis.2d 329, 355, 187 N.W.2d 182, 185 (1971) (no basis for contribution if Pierringer release). Because the jury then determines the relative fault of all par......
-
Michaels v. Mr. Heater, Inc.
...tortfeasors, settlement with one defendant does not bar recovery against other defendants. See, e.g., Peiffer v. Allstate Ins. Co., 51 Wis.2d 329, 335-36, 187 N.W.2d 182, 185 (1971); Pierringer v. Hoger, 21 Wis.2d 182, 191-92, 124 N.W.2d 106, 111-12 (1963). Therefore, plaintiff's settlement......
-
Swanigan v. State Farm Ins. Co.
...tort-feasor from any future liability, including contribution, deriving from the automobile accident. Peiffer v. Allstate Ins. Co., 51 Wis.2d 329, 334-335, 187 N.W.2d 182 (1971). State Farm thus argues that if this court allows the injured party to recover from the sponsor and allows the sp......
-
Badger Pharmacal, Inc. v. Colgate-Palmolive Co.
...as possible so that no part is rendered surplusage, Pleva, 456 N.W.2d at 362; Koenings, 377 N.W.2d at 602; Peiffer v. Allstate Insurance Co., 51 Wis.2d 329, 187 N.W.2d 182, 185 (1971); Marion v. Orson's Camera Centers, Inc., 29 Wis.2d 339, 138 N.W.2d 733, 735 (1966), we conclude that Sec. 2......