915 S.W.2d 420 (Tenn.1996); Bervoets v. Harde Ralls Pontiac-Olds, Inc., 891 S.W.2d 905 (Tenn.1994); 2. cases in which joint and several liability continues to apply under doctrines such as the family purpose doctrine, cases in which tortfeasors act in concert or collectively with one another, cases in which the doctrine of re-spondeat superior permits vicarious liability due to an agency-type relationship, or in the “appropriate” products liability case, see Resolution Trust Corp. v. Block, 924 S.W.2d 354 (Tenn.1996); Camper v. Minor, 915 S.W.2d 437 (Tenn.1996); Owens v. Truckstops of Amen, 915 S.W.2d 420 (Tenn.1996), or 3. in the “appropriate case” in which “fairness demands,” see Owens, 915 S.W.2d at 430 (allowing contribution when “fairness demands”); Bervoets, 891 S.W.2d at 907 (<HOLDING>). The third circumstance, however, is not a
holding defendants were fiduciaries because they had discretion to determine the extent of the companys annual contribution to the plan and whether the contribution would be made in  stock or cash holding that contribution will lie where no statute precludes recovery from the joint tortfeasor against whom contribution is sought recognizing contribution in the appropriate case 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 a right to contribution