MBNA cites Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors v. R.F. Lafferty & Co., Inc., supra. The Trustee contends that the aforementioned case is distinguishable from the instant case because the claim at issue here is one for contribution. In his claim in the Amended Complaint, the Trustee alleges that the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has sued CPSI for alleged violations of consumer laws, that MBNA was an active participant in and encouraged CPCI’s business practices and that, to the extent CPSI is held liable for consumer violations, that MBNA should be held jointly liable as a joint tort-feasor. Amended Complaint ¶¶ 99-107 (emphasis added). Under the common law of Delaware, no right to contribution existed among tortfeasors. Lutz v. Boltz, 48 Del. 197, 199, 100 A.2d 647, 647 (1953) (<HOLDING>). Under the common law of Pennsylvania,
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 recognizing a right to contribution 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 holding that contribution will lie where no statute precludes recovery from the joint tortfeasor against whom contribution is sought