A non-settling tortfeasor's judgment is reduced by which amount?

A non-settling tortfeasor's judgment is reduced by which amount?

• A. The amount of the settlement
• B. The settling tortfeasor's equitable share of fault
• C. The greater of the settlement amount or the settling tortfeasor's equitable share of fault
• D. None

Answer: (C)

The main concept is how settlements affect the liability of a non-settling tortfeasor when multiple wrongdoers are involved. If one defendant settles with the plaintiff, the remaining defendant’s judgment is adjusted to reflect that settlement and the relative fault of the settling party. The correct approach is that the reduction to the non-settling defendant’s liability is the greater of the settlement amount or the settling tortfeasor’s equitable share of fault. This ensures fairness: if the settling party bore a large share of the fault, the non-settling defendant isn’t relieved of more than their proper portion; and if the settlement amount is very large, the plaintiff benefits from that fixed payment without letting the fault allocation distort the recovery. For example, if total damages are 100 and the settling party is 40% at fault (their equitable share is 40), and they settle for 25, you would reduce the non-settling defendant’s judgment by the larger amount, 40. If instead the settlement is 60, you’d reduce by the larger amount, 60. This rule prevents double recovery while aligning adjustments with both the actual settlement and each party’s fault contribution.

The main concept is how settlements affect the liability of a non-settling tortfeasor when multiple wrongdoers are involved. If one defendant settles with the plaintiff, the remaining defendant’s judgment is adjusted to reflect that settlement and the relative fault of the settling party.

The correct approach is that the reduction to the non-settling defendant’s liability is the greater of the settlement amount or the settling tortfeasor’s equitable share of fault. This ensures fairness: if the settling party bore a large share of the fault, the non-settling defendant isn’t relieved of more than their proper portion; and if the settlement amount is very large, the plaintiff benefits from that fixed payment without letting the fault allocation distort the recovery.

For example, if total damages are 100 and the settling party is 40% at fault (their equitable share is 40), and they settle for 25, you would reduce the non-settling defendant’s judgment by the larger amount, 40. If instead the settlement is 60, you’d reduce by the larger amount, 60. This rule prevents double recovery while aligning adjustments with both the actual settlement and each party’s fault contribution.