Cite as: 511 U. S. 202 (1994)
Opinion of the Court
has been a judgment against multiple defendants. It can result in one defendant's paying more than its apportioned share of liability when the plaintiff's recovery from other defendants is limited by factors beyond the plaintiff's control, such as a defendant's insolvency. When the limitations on the plaintiff's recovery arise from outside forces, joint and several liability makes the other defendants, rather than an innocent plaintiff, responsible for the shortfall. Ibid.32 Unlike the rule in Edmonds, the proportionate share rule announced in this opinion applies when there has been a settlement. In such cases, the plaintiff's recovery against the settling defendant has been limited not by outside forces, but by its own agreement to settle. There is no reason to allocate any shortfall to the other defendants, who were not parties to the settlement. Just as the other defendants are not entitled to a reduction in liability when the plaintiff negotiates a generous settlement, see supra, at 219-220, so they are not required to shoulder disproportionate liability when the plaintiff negotiates a meager one.
V
The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
It is so ordered.
32 See also Uniform Comparative Fault Act § 2 (reallocation of insolvent defendant's equitable share), id., at 50.
221
Page: Index Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20Last modified: October 4, 2007