Where two or more persons are liable in respect of the same liability, in most common law legal systems they may either be: In the most general sense, a liability is anything that is a hinderance, or puts one at a disadvantage. ... In the most general sense, a liability is anything that is a hindrance, or puts individuals at a disadvantage. ... This article concerns the common-law legal system, as contrasted with the civil law legal system; for other meanings of the term, within the field of law, see common law (disambiguation). ...

• jointly liable, or
• severally liable, or
• jointly and severally liable.

Joint liability

If parties have joint liability, then they are each liable up to the full amount of the relevant obligation. So if a husband and wife take out a loan from a bank, the loan agreement will normally provide that they are to be "jointly liable" for the full amount. If one party dies, disappears or is declared bankrupt, the other remains fully liable. Accordingly, the bank can sue one, or other, or both, for the full amount. However, in suing, the creditor only has one course of action, i.e., the creditor can only sue for each debt once. If, for example, there are three partners, and the creditor only sues two of them for the outstanding loan amount and cannot recover the full amount, he cannot recover the remaining amount from the partner who is left out of the lawsuit. An obligation can be legal or moral. ... The examples and perspective in this article or section may not represent a worldwide view. ... A loan is a type of debt. ... “Banker” redirects here. ... Look up Agreement in Wiktionary, the free dictionary An agreement may be an agreement in beliefs, rules, practices (policies), or conduct. ... Notice of closure stuck on the door of a computer store the day after its parent company, Granville Technology Group Ltd, declared bankruptcy (strictly, put into administration - see text) in the UK. Bankruptcy is a legally declared inability or impairment of ability of an individual or organizations to pay their... A creditor is a party (e. ... A partnership is a type of business entity in which partners share with each other the profits or losses of the business undertaking in which all have invested. ...

Several liability

The converse is several liability, where the parties are liable for only their respective obligations. A common example of several liability is in syndicated loan agreements, which will normally provide that each bank is severally liable for its own part of the loan. If one bank fails to advance its agreed part of the loan to the borrower, then the borrower can only sue that bank, and the other banks in the syndicate have no liability. A syndicated loan (or syndicated bank facility) is a large loan in which a group of banks work together to provide funds for a borrower. ... // [edit] Etymology The word comes from French syndicat which means administrator especially in matters regarding a certain geographical area, from the Latin word syndicus which in turn comes from the Greek word σύνδικος (syndikos) which means caretaker of an issue, compare to ombudsperson or representative. ...

Joint and several liability

Joint and several liability is a hybrid of both; with respect to the claimant, the parties are jointly liable, but as between obligors themselves, the liabilities are several. This means that if the claimant pursues one party, and receives payment in full, that party can then pursue the other obligors for a contribution to their share of the liability.

Joint and several liability is most relevant in tort claims, whereby a plaintiff may recover all the damages from any of the defendants regardless of their individual share of the liability. The rule is often applied in negligence cases, though it is sometimes invoked in other areas of law. In the United States, forty-six of the fifty States have a rule of joint and several liability, although in response to tort reform efforts, some have limited the applicability of the rule. Tort is a legal term that means a civil wrong, as opposed to a criminal wrong, that is recognized by law as grounds for a lawsuit. ... A plaintiff, also known as a claimant or complainer, is the party who initiates a lawsuit (also known as an action) before a court. ... In law, damages refers to the money paid or awarded to a claimant (as it is known in the UK) or plaintiff (in the US) following their successful claim in a civil action. ... A defendant or defender is any party who is required to answer the complaint of a plaintiff or pursuer in a civil lawsuit before a court, or any party who has been formally charged or accused of violating a criminal statute. ... Negligence is a legal concept usually used to achieve compensation for accidents and injuries. ... Tort reform is the phrase used by its advocates who claim it is a change in the legal system to reduce litigations alleged adverse effects on the economy. ...

Criticisms of joint and several liability

Joint and several liability is premised on the theory that the defendants are in the best position to apportion damages amongst themselves. Once liability has been established and damages awarded, the defendants are free to litigate amongst themselves to better divide liability. The plaintiff no longer needs to be involved in the litigation and can avoid the cost of continuing litigation. // A lawsuit is a civil action brought before a court in which the party commencing the action, the plaintiff, seeks a legal remedy. ...

Defenders of the principle of joint and several liability further argue that it protects victims from being undercompensated if one of the defendants can not pay his or her share of proportionate liability.

Opponents of the principle of joint and several liability note that its use (instead of proportionate responsibility) has led to cases in which a party with a very minor part of the responsibility unfairly shoulders the burden of damages. The classic example is the uninsured drunk driver who injures someone; the plaintiff will sue both the insolvent drunk driver and the state highway department (or automobile manufacturer), hoping to hold the latter 1% or 2% responsible yet forcing them to pay the entire award. Joint and several liability, reform supporters argue, leads to lawyers searching for "deep pockets" to sue (in the expectation that they will settle rather than risk trial), even though those defendants may only be remotely related to an incident.

According to Richard Wehe, Assistant Chief Counsel at the California Department of Transportation, (Caltrans), "I can tell you that in many, many settlement conferences or mediations I am confronted with plaintiff's lawyer's statements that, 'I only need to establish that the state is 1 % at fault and I can recover all of my economic damages.'"[1] Caltrans logo The soaring ramps in the stack interchanges favored by Caltrans often provide stunning views. ...

Where a financially wealthy defendant can be joined as a defendant, a plaintiff has a greater chance of recovering damages than when the defendants are financially insolvent, or judgment proof. To meet Wikipedias quality standards, this article or section may require cleanup. ... A person is said to be judgment proof where they are either immune or able to otherwise escape prosecution for their conduct. ...

Example

If Ann is struck by a car driven by Bob, who was served in Charlotte's bar (and the state has dramshop laws), then both Bob and Charlotte may be held jointly liable for Ann's injuries. The jury determines Ann should be awarded $10 million and that Bob was 90% at fault and Charlotte 10% at fault. Dram shop is a legal term in the United States for laws covering the liability of people serving liquor. ... This article or section does not cite any references or sources. ...

• Under joint and several liability, Ann may recover the full damages from either of the defendants. If Ann sued Charlotte alone, Charlotte would have to pay the full $10M despite only being at fault for $1M. (However, in most jurisdictions, Charlotte would be able to join Bob as defendant in Ann's suit against her. Charlotte would also have a separate action against Bob for $9M, though she would remain liable to Ann for the full $10M.)
• Under proportionate liability, Bob would have to pay $9M and Charlotte would have to pay $1M. If Bob does not have any money, Ann only gets the $1M from Charlotte.

To meet Wikipedias quality standards, this article or section may require cleanup. ...

See also

• Tort reform
• Walt Disney World Co. v. Wood, 489 So. 2d 61 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986).
• Walt Disney CA No. 15452