John J. Breen, Plaintiff-Respondent v. Harry G. Peck, Defendant-Appellant

Summary

The Supreme Court of New Jersey affirmed the Appellate Division, holding that the plaintiff's release of his claim against Levine did not automatically bar his tortious interference claim against Peck because the release's effect on joint tortfeasors depends on the parties' intent and whether full compensation was received; the court also held that summary judgment was improper where no clear, undisputed factual showing of absence of tortious interference existed. Justice Hehek, in a concurring opinion, reiterated the common‑law rule that a release of one tortfeasor discharges all unless it is a covenant not to sue and noted the lack of contribution among joint tortfeasors in pari delicto.