New Jersey Section 2C:35B-11 – Right of Action for Contribution

New Jersey’s Section 2C:35B-11 provides a right of action for contribution in civil lawsuits related to violations of the state’s drug laws. This allows defendants who have been found liable in a civil drug case to seek contribution from other parties who may share responsibility.

How Section 2C:35B-11 Works

Section 2C:35B-11 specifically provides for contribution in civil lawsuits relating to violations of New Jersey’s Comprehensive Drug Reform Act. This allows defendants in drug-related injury cases to spread the liability.

For example, let’s say Steve sues opioid manufacturers, distributors, and pharmacies for his addiction. Distributor A and Pharmacy B are found liable for $500,000 in damages. Under 2C:35B-11, Distributor A could seek contribution from Pharmacy B to pay part of the judgment, rather than bearing the whole cost alone.

The contribution claim can be brought in the original lawsuit or through a separate action. The court will determine equitable shares of liability based on the parties’ relative responsibility. However, a defendant’s contribution share cannot exceed their own liability.

Policy Reasons for 2C:35B-11

The New Jersey Legislature enacted Section 2C:35B-11 to address policy concerns in drug injury lawsuits. These include:

• Fairness – As mentioned, contribution spreads liability so no one defendant pays more than their fair share. This enhances equity between defendants.
• Deterrence – By allowing contribution, 2C:35B-11 deters all parties involved in drug activities. Defendants can’t escape liability just because other actors contributed to the harm.
• Compensation – Contribution enhances plaintiffs’ ability to recover full damages. Plaintiffs can pursue any defendant, not just ones with the deepest pockets.
• Judicial Efficiency – Allowing contribution claims in the original action avoids duplicative suits on the same facts.

Overall, 2C:35B-11 provides a just method for allocating fault and compensation in drug injury cases.

Limits and Uncertainties

However, Section 2C:35B-11 leaves some issues unresolved. Key questions include:

• What is the method for calculating each defendant’s equitable share of liability? The statute doesn’t specify how courts should apportion damages.
• Does settling with the plaintiff bar a contribution claim against that party? Many states prohibit “non-settling” defendants from seeking contribution from “settling” defendants. But New Jersey’s statute is silent on this.
• Can a defendant seek contribution from parties who weren’t sued by the plaintiff? In other contexts, New Jersey allows this “third-party practice.” But again, 2C:35B-11 doesn’t address it.

Because of these uncertainties, defendants should analyze contribution issues early when facing drug injury lawsuits. Consulting an experienced New Jersey attorney is advisable to fully understand these claims.

Example Scenario

Here is an example of how 2C:35B-11 could apply:

• Steve becomes addicted to opioid painkillers after taking them for a back injury. He sues the manufacturer, his prescribing doctor, and the pharmacy that filled the prescriptions.
• The manufacturer settles with Steve before trial for $300,000.
• At trial, the jury awards Steve $1 million in damages. The doctor and pharmacy are found 75% and 25% liable, respectively.
• Under 2C:35B-11, the pharmacy can seek contribution from the doctor for the portion exceeding its share of liability. Here, the pharmacy paid $250,000 (25% of $1 million) but was only responsible for 1/4 of the total damages.
• The pharmacy can recover $125,000 from the doctor to equalize their shares. But the pharmacy can’t seek contribution from the settled manufacturer.

This demonstrates how Section 2C:35B-11 allows equitable spreading of liability in drug injury cases. Defendants should consider all options for pursuing contribution when facing such lawsuits.

Conclusion

Section 2C:35B-11 provides an important right of contribution in New Jersey drug injury lawsuits. This allows liability to be fairly allocated among responsible parties by percentages of fault. However, uncertainties remain regarding calculation methods, settlement impacts, and third-party claims. Defendants should analyze contribution issues closely when developing legal strategies. Consulting experienced counsel can help fully leverage these rights.

While the statute leaves some questions unanswered, 2C:35B-11 reflects sound public policy. It enhances fairness, compensation, and deterrence in these cases. New Jersey courts will continue shaping contribution law as they interpret and apply Section 2C:35B-11 in practice. But the basic right remains an important tool for defendants seeking to equitably spread liability for drug-related harms.