 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Hill v. Scartascini9/6/2000
he damage award is less than the amount paid by the settling defendant. The Court of Appeals framed the issue as
...whether the amount paid by the settling defendant in excess of a pro rata share generally operates to reduce the total claim and,...whether the excess paid operates to satisfy any judgment to be entered for the injured party against the non-settling tortfeasor. For reasons hereinafter stated we shall hold that the total claim is satisfied....
*
The issue is the effect which the release given by the Plaintiffs to Suburban has on any judgment to be entered against Martinez. On that issue [the Act] is dispositive. It tells us that the Plaintiffs' release of Suburban `reduces the claim against' Martinez. Id. at 94 (Emphasis added).
The Court of Appeals remanded the case to this Court for "remand to the Circuit Court for Montgomery County with instructions to enter as `satisfied' the judgment...." Id. at 105. See also Keene Corp. v. Levin, 330 Md. 287, 293, 623 A.2d 662 (1993) (citing Martinez for the proposition that "it is conceivable that the amount of money already paid to the plaintiffs by settling defendants may exceed the amount of compensatory damages awarded them in these cases, in which event the claims of the plaintiffs for compensatory damages would be wholly satisfied.") (Emphasis added.)
The facts in this case are similar to those in Martinez. Here, the jury did not find in Dr. Scartascini's favor, as the court's order suggests, but rather determined that he had damaged the plaintiff to the extent of more than $72,000. An entry of zero dollars ($0.00) and a judgment in his favor pursuant to a release he did not "purchase" or sign should not be used to vindicate his actions. The defendants are not required to pay the amount found due by the jury because Dimensions earlier had paid the plaintiff more than the award. However, the doctor was certainly not exonerated nor was he absolved of responsibility for the plaintiff's injuries simply because the jury awarded less than had already been paid pursuant to the Joint Tortfeasor's Release. Therefore, a judgment in his favor is not accurate. This Court finds that the most accurate entry to the docket entries of the Circuit Court for Prince George's County, and that which is consistent with the statute, the release, and the verdict, is as follows:
Judgment for plaintiff. Jury award of $72,056.87 reduced and satisfied pursuant to the Joint Tortfeasor's Release dated August 9, 1999.
JUDGMENT REVERSED. CASE REMANDED TO THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY WITH INSTRUCTIONS TO ENTER JUDGMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS OPINION.
COSTS TO BE PAID BY APPELLEES.
Page 1 2 3 Maryland Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|