Landers owned a lake that he kept full of fish. A
pipeline owned by East Texas ruptured and saltwater flowed into the lake,
poisoning the fish (and causing other damages).
At the same time, a pipeline owned by Sun Oil Company
ruptured and more saltwater and oil entered Landers' lake.
Landers sued both East Texas and Sun Oil for negligence.
Landers complaint made the two defendants jointly and
severally liable for the damages.
Landers argued that it was not possible to determine
which spill caused what damage.
East Texas and Sun Oil both looked to a previous Texas
Appellate Court decision to avoid liability:
In the case of Sun Oil Co. v. Robicheaux (Tex.
Com. App., 23 S.W.2d 713), it was held that when two defendants both take
independent actions that result in damage then each defendant is only
responsible for the damages which directly and proximately result from
their act.
The fact that it is difficult (or impossible) to define
who caused what damage does not change the rule.
Basically, this ruling would have made it impossible for
Landers to recover any damages, since he could not meet the burden of
proof for determining which pipe rupture killed which fish.
In Landers' case, the Appellate Court decided to overrule Robicheaux
since it was inherently unfair.
The new rule is that, where tortuous acts of two or more
wrongdoers join to produce an indivisible injury (an injury which cannot
be apportioned with reasonable certainty to the individual wrongdoers),
all of the wrongdoers will be held jointly and severally liable
for the entire damages and the injured party may proceed to judgment
against any one separately or against all in one suit.
The Court also ruled that if there is a segment of the
damage that can be attributed to a single tortfeasor, then that liability
is borne solely by them.
