or has paid more than his pro rata share thereof.” 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 8324(b). See also 10 Del. C. § 6302. Accordingly, contribution is only available to tort-feasors who have made payment to a plaintiff for wrongdoing to that plaintiff. The right of contribution thus serves a distinct purpose, allowing the innocent injured person to recover against either of two (or more) joint tort-feasors without regard to the allocation of responsibility which is left to the wrongdoers to address inter se. 18 . In Anstine v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 352 Pa. 547, 549, 43 A.2d 109, 110 (1945), the Pennsylvania Supreme Court recognized that its statute allowing for contribution among joint tortfeasors "originated in equity.” See also Austin Road Co. v. Rope, 147 Tex. 430, 434, 216 S.W.2d 563, 565 (1949) (<HOLDING>). 19 . At the hearing on the Motion, MBNA also
recognizing contribution in the appropriate case recognizing rule in ucata states that where settling defendant settles only his share contribution does not lie but contribution may be had from defendant whose liability was extinguished by joint tortfeasors settlement recognizing a right to contribution recognizing that prior to 1949 when the statute permitting contribution among joint tortfeasors was enacted no right of contribution existed between jointtortfeasors in delaware recognizing that statutory provision for contribution was enacted to relieve the rigor of the common law and allow enforced contribution among joint tortfeasors who are in pari delicto as to each other and thereby place the burden equally upon all solvent tortfeasors