- 21 -
circumstances to ascertain in lieu of what the settlement amount
of $8,500,000 was paid. Id.
We do not find that the evidence supports petitioners'
assertion that none of the amount paid in settlement was paid in
lieu of either punitive damages or interest. To the contrary,
the partial settlement agreement shows that Harte-Hanks agreed to
pay, and petitioner agreed to accept, $2,400,000 in satisfaction
of the principal amount of the judgment between $7 million and
$12 million, and to extinguish any and all postjudgment interest
liability on the first $22 million of the judgment. Furthermore,
Columbia and Hudson agreed to pay, and petitioner agreed to
accept, $3 million in satisfaction of the principal amount of the
judgment between $12 million and $22 million. Columbia's and
Hudson's liability threshold was $12 million, and the judgment
provided total actual damages of $11,500,000; Columbia and Hudson
would not have paid $3 million unless they thought prejudgment
interest and punitive damages would total at least $3,500,000.
Harte-Hanks' agreement to pay postjudgment interest and
Columbia's and Hudson's actual payment of several millions of
dollars speak with a voice heard more clearly than petitioners'
assertions. We find that petitioners have not carried their
burden of proving that respondent's determinations are erroneous.
On brief, respondent proposes an alternative method of
allocation which he concedes may be "the most proper methodology
to use to allocate the settlement payment." Under this
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011