Caution!

Visiting this web site requires a newer version of Netscape Communicator.

Visit Microsoft's Web site to obtain the newest version of Internet Explorer, or visit Netscape's Web site to obtain the newest version of Netscape Communicator.

Visiting this web site without first upgrading your browser may result in unreliable behavior.













Ervin A. Gonzalez



Home


Ervin A. Gonzalez


Areas of Expertise


Mission Statement


Contact Us

CASES



Cases In The News


Significant Verdicts


Referrals

TRIAL TIPS



Trial Tips - Articles


Trial Tips Via E-Mail


Advanced Trial Handbook

LINKS



Consumer Links


Legal Links

CALENDAR



Seminars & Events

COMMENTARY



Chinese Drywall - Time to Take Action


Schiavo Matter Challenges Bush's Tort Reform Plan


Public School Segregation


Tort Reform


Judicial Independence


Safe Driving

NEWS ITEMS



News Releases


Video Clips


News Stories

MY BLOG



Trial Tips Blog


Sitemap




 

305-476-7400  

EAGonzalez@ErvinGonzalez.com  




Helpful "Trial Tips®" to Hone Your Litigation Skills

Copyright © 2007

By: Ervin A. Gonzalez, Esq.
Board Certified Civil Trial Lawyer,
Florida Bar and National Board of Trial Advocacy


View the previous item
View the index page
View all items
View the next item

Death of the Doctorine of Joint & Several Liability

“THE DEATH OF THE DOCTRINE OF JOINT AND SEVERAL LIABILITY”

 

The long-standing tort doctrine of Joint and Several Liability was completely repealed this legislative session.  Now the law will hold Defendants in a tort case responsible only for the percentage of the damages that each caused the Plaintiff to sustain.  In its pure state, the Doctrine of Joint and Several Liability required any Defendant to pay for the damages caused by all Defendants even if the Defendant paying for all the damages was found to be at fault for a small percentage of the damages. 

 

The abolition of the doctrine of Joint and Several Liability is seen by business interests as a good thing.  The argument is that the law will require all responsible parties to pay only their fair share of the damages caused to a Plaintiff based on the percentage of fault determined by the Jury.  Many consumer and victim groups oppose the change and believe that it will unfairly place the burden of unpaid damages on the victims instead of Defendants who were found to be at fault by a jury. 

 

In 1999, a major overhaul of the Joint and Several Liability law was undertaken that resulted in a graduated scale based on a comparison of fault of the parties involved.  The 1999 law that remained in effect until this spring contained the following language: 

 

THE OLD LAW

 

Florida Statute Section 768.81. Comparative fault


(3) Apportionment of damages.-- In cases to which this section applies, the court shall enter judgment against each party liable on the basis of such party's percentage of fault and not on the basis of the doctrine of joint and several liability, except as provided in paragraphs (a), (b), and (c):


(a) Where a plaintiff is found to be at fault, the following shall apply:


1. Any defendant found 10 percent or less at fault shall not be subject to joint and several liability.
2. For any defendant found more than 10 percent but less than 25 percent at fault, joint and several liability shall not apply to that portion of economic damages in excess of $200,000.
3. For any defendant found at least 25 percent but not more than 50 percent at fault, joint and several liability shall not apply to that portion of economic damages in excess of $500,000.
4. For any defendant found more than 50 percent at fault, joint and several liability shall not apply to that portion of economic damages in excess of $1 million.

For any defendant under subparagraph 2., subparagraph 3., or subparagraph 4., the amount of economic damages calculated under joint and several liability shall be in addition to the amount of economic and non-economic damages already apportioned to that defendant based on that defendant's percentage of fault.


(b) Where a plaintiff is found to be without fault, the following shall apply:


1. Any defendant found less than 10 percent at fault shall not be subject to joint and several liability.
2. For any defendant found at least 10 percent but less than 25 percent at fault, joint and several liability shall not apply to that portion of economic damages in excess of $500,000.
3. For any defendant found at least 25 percent but not more than 50 percent at fault, joint and several liability shall not apply to that portion of economic damages in excess of $1 million.
4. For any defendant found more than 50 percent at fault, joint and several liability shall not apply to that portion of economic damages in excess of $2 million.

For any defendant under subparagraph 2., subparagraph 3., or subparagraph 4., the amount of economic damages calculated under joint and several liability shall be in addition to the amount of economic and non-economic damages already apportioned to that defendant based on that defendant's percentage of fault.


(c) With respect to any defendant whose percentage of fault is less than the fault of a particular plaintiff, the doctrine of joint and several liability shall not apply to any damages imposed against the defendant.

 

THE NEW LAW

 

            The 2006 law reads as follows: 

 

Florida Statute Section 768.81. Comparative fault


(3) Apportionment of damages.-- In cases to which this section applies, the court shall enter judgment against each party liable on the basis of such party's percentage of fault and not on the basis of the doctrine of joint and several liability.

 

CONCLUSION

 

From a practical perspective, this amendment will require a Plaintiff to bring in every conceivable party as a Defendant in a personal injury or wrongful death case so that each Defendant will be required to pay the appropriate share of damages in the case based on the allocation of fault decided by the Jury.  The amendment ends the common law principle of Joint and Several Liability, which had been watered down over the years by statutory amendments.  For better or worse, Florida is now a true comparative fault state. 

 














The hiring of an attorney is an important decision and should not be based on advertising alone.
Please feel free to contact me for further information on my qualifications.

This site was created by JBG Communications - Marketing and Public Relations





Sign In
Sign In