GOL 15-108 Bars Contribution Claim Against Settling Tortfeasor

On May 16, 2022, Justice Cohen of the New York County issued a decision in George S. Kaufman Charitable Found. v. Kearns, 2022 NY Slip Op. 31595(U), holding that GOL 15-108 barred a contribution claim against a settling tortfeasor, explaining:

The Third-Party Plaintiffs’ claim for contribution is statutorily barred by New York General Obligations Law (“GOL”) § 15-108 because the Release Agreement, executed by Plaintiffs in the main action, released the Third-Party Defendants of all claims related to or involving, in any way, the Post-Mortem Advice or Third-Party Action.

GOL § 15-108 [a] provides that a release given to one of two or more persons liable or claimed to be liable in tort for the same injury reduces the claim of the releasor against the other tortfeasors in the amount stipulated by the release, the consideration paid for it, or the released tortfeasor’s equitable share of the damages, whichever is greatest. And under GOL § 15-108 [b], a release given in good faith by the injured person to one tortfeasor as provided in subdivision (a) relieves him from liability to any other person for contribution. The general purpose of section 15-108 of the General Obligations Law is to encourage settlements, with sub-section [b], in particular, permitting a defendant to settle with plaintiff without fear of being brought back into the action by another defendant seeking contribution.

A release agreement falls within the ambit of the statute, and thus bars contribution claims, if (1) the plaintiff receives, as part of the agreement, monetary consideration greater than one dollar; (2) the release completely or substantially terminates the dispute between the plaintiff and the person who was claimed to be liable; and (3) the release is provided prior
to entry of judgment.

Here, the Release Agreement, on its face, satisfies these conditions. Plaintiffs received, as part of the Release Agreement, monetary consideration greater than one dollar (i.e., $10), along with other good and valuable consideration. The Release Agreement also completely or substantially terminates the dispute between Plaintiffs and their counsel, the Third-Party Defendants. And the Release Agreement was provided prior to entry of judgment.

The Third-Party Plaintiffs contend that discovery is needed to determine whether the Release was given in good faith by the injured party, as required under GOL § 15-108 [b], but the record here does not raise a genuine question of bad faith. Although Third-Party Defendants represent Plaintiffs as counsel in the main action, the Release Agreement states that they each sought and obtained advice from their respective, independent counsel before entering into the Agreement. The affidavit submitted by Bessemer Trust on this motion, moreover, confirms that it considered carefully the allegations in the contribution claim and consulted about them with outside counsel that is not otherwise involved in this litigation before agreeing to the Release.

And contrary to the Third-Party Plaintiffs’ suggestion, neither the timing of the Release nor the amount of the settlement casts doubt on the Releasor’s good faith.

. . .

The upshot of the Release Agreement is to leave intact the claims and defenses of each party in the main action. It does not enlarge the Third-Party Plaintiffs’ exposure in the main action, because they can still argue to the fact-finder that the Estate’s lawyers, or others, were responsible for causing some or all of the alleged harm to the Estate in that action. It may limit the Estate’s opportunity for recovery, insofar as the fact-finder allocates some portion of liability to a released party, because the Estate could not make itself whole by recovering from such party. But that is the risk the Estate has signed onto, based on
the determination it has made, with the benefit of independent counsel, that any potential claim against its lawyers is basically worthless. And, absent some evidence to suspect improper collusion or other risk of prejudice to the Third-Party Plaintiffs not shown here, the Court will not second-guess that determination.

(Internal quotations and citations omitted).

Stay informed!
Sign up for email alerts and notifications here.
Read more about our Complex Commercial Litigation practice.