Opinion
November 16, 1953.
January 4, 1954.
Contracts — Releases — Construction — Release of liability for accident — Bar to subsequent joinder as additional defendant.
Where A operated an automobile which collided with another automobile operated by B in which C was a passenger, and thereafter A executed a valid release releasing B "from all, and all manner of, actions and causes of action, suits, . . . claims and demands whatsoever in law and equity, especially the liability arising out of the accident . . ."; and thereafter C instituted a suit in trespass against A and A sought to join B as an additional defendant, it was Held that the release barred such joinder and that the court below had properly entered judgment in favor of B.
Before STERN, C. J., STEARNE, JONES, BELL, CHIDSEY, MUSMANNO and ARNOLD, JJ.
Appeals, Nos. 311 and 312, Jan. T., 1953, from judgment of Court of Common Pleas, No. 2 of Philadelphia County, Sept. T., 1952, No. 4464, in case of Elizabeth Killian v. George Catanese, Mario Catanese and George Wasilky. Judgment affirmed.
Proceeding upon motion of original defendants for judgment on the pleadings against additional defendant in action of trespass for personal injuries.
The facts are stated in the opinion, by LEWIS P.J., of the court below, as follows:
Elizabeth Killian brought her action in trespass for personal injuries sustained by her in an intersectional collision at 9th and Passyunk Avenue, Philadelphia, on April 5, 1952. She alleged that the original defendants, one as owner, the other as operator, were responsible for her injuries when their automobile collided with the one in which she was a passenger. The original defendants issued a writ to join one George Wasilky as an additional defendant, averring that he was the operator of the automobile in which plaintiff was a passenger, and that his negligence caused her injuries. George Wasilky filed his answer to defendants' complaint, admitting the various averments of negligence, but setting up a release in the new matter. The release (incorporated into additional defendant's answer and new matter) was executed and delivered by original defendants to the additional defendant. Plaintiff is not a party to the release. It recites that in consideration of the sum of Two Hundred and Fifty ($250) Dollars, the defendants, the Cataneses, "do hereby remise, release, and forever discharge GEORGE WASILKY, his heirs, executors and administrators, of and from all, and all manner of, actions and causes of action, suits, debts, dues, accounts, bonds, covenants, contracts, agreements, judgments, claims and demands whatsoever in law or equity, especially the liability arising out of the accident on or about April 5, 1952, at or about 9th and Passyunk Avenues in the City and County of Philadelphia." The italicized portion is the writing inserted into the printed form employed by the Cataneses.
The original defendants then filed an answer to the new matter averring that the release which they gave to the additional defendant did not constitute a bar to their right to join him as an additional defendant in the action which Elizabeth Killian had brought against them. At this stage of the pleadings original defendants filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings based on additional defendant's admissions in the pleadings, and raised the issue of the release.
We refused original defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings and entered judgment for the additional defendant, because we believed that the release given by the original defendants to additional defendant was a complete discharge of any and all liability, and as such, barred original defendants from bringing in George Wasilky as an additional defendant when plaintiff commenced her action. The language of the printed portion of the release is very broad. It releases the additional defendant of and from all, and all manner of, actions and causes of action, suits, claims and demands whatsoever in law or equity, by reason of any cause, matter or thing whatsoever. In addition, the original defendants inserted into the space provided for such writing, the specific statement that it was their intention to release additional defendant from "the liability arising out of the accident." Thus, no attempt was made to limit the scope of the release to claims and demands of the original defendants. Quite to the contrary, the release given was from all liability, and this, to our way of thinking, included any liability which original defendants might seek to impose on additional defendant by reason of any claim made against original defendants, as plaintiff has done here.
The very language employed by the parties indicates a clear intention to release George Wasilky from all liability arising out of the involved accident. This was the express consideration of the parties and the very language employed in the release, and is therefore binding: Brill's Estate, 337 Pa. 525 (1940). The specific recital found in the subject matter of the release reveals the intention of the parties to release additional defendant from all liability: Lancaster Trust Co. v. Engle, 337 Pa. 176 (1940).
Accordingly, we granted the motion for judgment in favor of additional defendant on the pleadings.
Original defendants appealed.
Robert C. Duffy, with him Francis Logan, for appellants.
John Edward Sheridan, for appellee.
The judgment of the court below is affirmed on the opinion of Judge EDWIN O. LEWIS.