Ariz. Rev. Stat. » Title 12
Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-2504 (2026)

Release or covenant not to sue

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

If a release or a covenant not to sue or not to enforce judgment is given in good faith to one of two or more persons liable in tort for the same injury or the same wrongful death both of the following apply:

1. It does not discharge any of the other tortfeasors from liability for the injury or wrongful death unless its terms so provide, but it reduces the claim against the others to the extent of any amount stipulated by the release or the covenant or in the amount of the consideration paid for it, whichever is the greater.

2. It discharges the tortfeasor to whom it is given from all liability for contribution to any other tortfeasor.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 21 cases, 1989–2019 · leading case: Neil v. Kavena, 859 P.2d 203 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1993).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Neil v. Kavena, 859 P.2d 203 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 22× “Included in the Act was A.R.S. § 12-2504, 1 which provides that a release of one tortfeasor does not discharge other tortfeasors who are not parties to the settlement.”
Shelby v. Action Scaffolding, Inc., 827 P.2d 462 (Ariz. 1992). · cites it 24× “Action claims that the plaintiff’s damages should be reduced in proportion to the plaintiff’s fault before deducting the settlement amount from the then-reduced damages. In his cross petition, plaintiff Stephen J.”
Jamerson v. Quintero, 313 P.3d 532 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 34× “Squarely addressing the issue in the first instance in Arizona, however, we conclude that pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-2504 (2013), a statute enacted 40 years after De Graff, a consent judgment in favor of a principal does not as a matter of law bar a claim against the tortfeasor…”
Law v. Verde Valley Med. Ctr., 170 P.3d 701 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 6× “¶ 14 Plaintiff also relies on A.R.S. § 12-2504 for the proposition that a release of one joint tortfeasor does not automatically release all other joint tortfeasors.”
Bishop v. Pecanic, 975 P.2d 114 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 19× “A.R.S. § 12-2504 (emphasis added). ¶ 9 The appellants urge us to accept the Single Recovery Rule, which mandates a deduction for sums paid by co-tortfeasors to settle a same-injury intentional tort claim.”
Dawson v. Withycombe, 163 P.3d 1034 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “When a defendant who is jointly liable for damages to a plaintiff enters into a settlement agreement with that plaintiff, the amount of the settlement is subtracted from the remaining joint tortfeasors’ damage award.”
Hyatt Regency Phoenix Hotel Co. v. Winston & Strawn, 907 P.2d 506 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 4× “Under the unique facts in this case we cannot agree and therefore we affirm the trial court's grant of credit on the compensatory damages.”
City of Tucson v. Superior Court, 798 P.2d 374 (Ariz. 1990). · cites it 6× “This argument is based on the language of A.R.S. § 12-2504, which provides as follows: If a release or covenant not to sue .”
Herstam v. Deloitte & Touche, LLP, 919 P.2d 1381 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 7× “” A.R.S.§ 12-2504. We acknowledge that giving a nonsetthng, jointly -hable tortfeasor a credit for the settling party’s payment for the release of liability protects against collusion and unfairness.”
Roland v. Bernstein, 828 P.2d 1237 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 6× “The question then arose whether under A.R.S. § 12-2504 the amount Bernstein had to pay should be reduced by the amount of the pre-existing settlements.”
Sw. Pet Prods., Inc. v. Koch Indus., Inc., 273 F. Supp. 2d 1041 (D. Ariz. 2003). · cites it 2× “Ariz.Rev.Stat. § 12-2504. Thus, Southwest’s damage claim against Benson would have to be decreased by the total amount it received from Koch.”
Schiffer v. United Grocers, Inc., 989 P.2d 10 (Or. 1999). · cites it 2× “Arizona: But see Ariz Rev Stat Ann § 12-2504 (1994 and Supp 1998) (release or covenant not to sue given in good faith to one of two or more joint tortfeasors does not discharge any of the other joint tortfeasors from liability unless its terms so provide; the released tortfeasor…”
Show all 21 citing cases →
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-2504(1) — 5 cases
Jamerson v. Quintero, 313 P.3d 532 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2013). “Squarely addressing the issue in the first instance in Arizona, however, we conclude that pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-2504 (2013), a statute enacted 40 years after De Graff, a consent judgment in favor of a principal does not as a matter of law bar a claim against the tortfeasor…”
Herstam v. Deloitte & Touche, LLP, 919 P.2d 1381 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1996). “” A.R.S.§ 12-2504. We acknowledge that giving a nonsetthng, jointly -hable tortfeasor a credit for the settling party’s payment for the release of liability protects against collusion and unfairness.”
Neil v. Kavena, 859 P.2d 203 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1993). “Included in the Act was A.R.S. § 12-2504, 1 which provides that a release of one tortfeasor does not discharge other tortfeasors who are not parties to the settlement.”
Shelby v. Action Scaffolding, Inc., 792 P.2d 765 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1990).
Vivian v. Cobb (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-2504(2) — 1 case
Bishop v. Pecanic, 975 P.2d 114 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1998). “A.R.S. § 12-2504 (emphasis added). ¶ 9 The appellants urge us to accept the Single Recovery Rule, which mandates a deduction for sums paid by co-tortfeasors to settle a same-injury intentional tort claim.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.