§
Subdivision 1.Joint liability.
When two or more persons are severally liable, contributions to awards shall be in proportion to the percentage of fault attributable to each, except that the following persons are jointly and severally liable for the whole award:
(1) a person whose fault is greater than 50 percent;
(2) two or more persons who act in a common scheme or plan that results in injury;
(3) a person who commits an intentional tort; or
(4) a person whose liability arises under chapters 18B - pesticide control, 115 - water pollution control, 115A - waste management, 115B - environmental response and liability, 115C - leaking underground storage tanks, and 299J - pipeline safety, public nuisance law for damage to the environment or the public health, any other environmental or public health law, or any environmental or public health ordinance or program of a municipality as defined in section 466.01.
This section applies to claims arising from events that occur on or after August 1, 2003.
§
Subd. 2.Reallocation of uncollectible amounts generally.
Upon motion made not later than one year after judgment is entered, the court shall determine whether all or part of a party's equitable share of the obligation is uncollectible from that party and shall reallocate any uncollectible amount among the other parties, including a claimant at fault, according to their respective percentages of fault. A party whose liability is reallocated is nonetheless subject to contribution and to any continuing liability to the claimant on the judgment.
§
Subd. 3.Product liability; reallocation of uncollectible amounts.
In the case of a claim arising from the manufacture, sale, use or consumption of a product, an amount uncollectible from any person in the chain of manufacture and distribution shall be reallocated among all other persons in the chain of manufacture and distribution but not among the claimant or others at fault who are not in the chain of manufacture or distribution of the product. Provided, however, that a person whose fault is less than that of a claimant is liable to the claimant only for that portion of the judgment which represents the percentage of fault attributable to the person whose fault is less.
Notes of Decisions
Alice Ann Staab v. Diocese of St. Cloud, 853 N.W.2d 713 (Minn. 2014).
· cites it 213× “________________________ 1 SYLLABUS A party that is severally liable under Minn. Stat. § 604.02 , subd. 1 (2012), cannot be ordered to contribute more than that party’s equitable share of the total damages award under the reallocation-of-damages provision in Minn.”
Staab v. Diocese of St. Cloud, 813 N.W.2d 68 (Minn. 2012).
· cites it 101× “This appeal requires us to interpret the meaning of Minn.Stat. § 604.02, subd. 1 (2010), to determine whether a defendant must pay an entire damages award when a special jury verdict attributes 50% of the negligence to the sole defendant and 50% of the negligence to a nonparty…”
Imlay v. City of Lake Crystal, 453 N.W.2d 326 (Minn. 1990).
· cites it 46× “In response to numerous post-trial motions, the trial court held Minn.Stat. § 604.02, subd. 1 (1986), did not violate equal protection and respondent’s purchase of liability insurance did not waive these limits on joint and several liability.”
Fish v. Ramler Trucking, Inc., 923 N.W.2d 337 (Minn. Ct. App. 2019).
· cites it 50× “BJORKMAN, Judge In this appeal from judgment following a jury trial on personal-injury claims arising out of a workplace accident, appellant asserts that the district court erred by (1) applying Minn. Stat. § 604.02 to reduce the judgment entered against respondent based on the…”
Hosley v. Armstrong Cork Co., 383 N.W.2d 289 (Minn. 1986).
· cites it 30× “Minn.Stat. § 604.02, subd. 2 (1984). 1 On appeal to the Minnesota Court of Appeals, Pittsburgh Corning contended that it should not assume responsibility for that portion of the damages attributed by the jury to Johns-Manville ($87,500) because, by executing a Pierringer…”
O'Brien v. Dombeck, 823 N.W.2d 895 (Minn. Ct. App. 2012).
· cites it 44× “Appellants Robert Dean Hareid and Central Valley Cooperative challenge the district court’s reallocation of respondent William Dombeck’s uncollectible share of a judgment pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 604.02, subd. 2. They also challenge the district court’s declination to apportion…”
Schneider v. Buckman, 433 N.W.2d 98 (Minn. 1988).
· cites it 20× “The only issues we will address on appeal are: whether Buckman is liable for both his negligence and his employee's negligence under the doctrine of respondeat superior; and whether Buckman is liable for 100% of the damages under Minn.”
Frederickson v. Alton M. Johnson Co., 402 N.W.2d 794 (Minn. 1987).
· cites it 20× “The principal issues are whether a jury verdict should be reduced by the percentage of fault attributable to a defendant settling by a Pierringer agreement when any contribution claims by the nonsettling defendants would be barred by the statute of limitations, and whether the…”
Hosley v. Armstrong Cork Co., 364 N.W.2d 813 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985).
· cites it 30× “Should Minn.Stat. § 604.02, subd. 2 (1982), be applied to reallocate a severed bankrupt's equitable share of the judgment? 3.”
Horton Ex Rel. Horton v. Orbeth, Inc., 342 N.W.2d 112 (Minn. 1984).
· cites it 16× “Minn. Stat. § 604.02 , subd. 1 (1982). Thus, the legislature has created a modified comparative fault system which comprises liability and contribution.”
Marcon v. Kmart Corp., 573 N.W.2d 728 (Minn. Ct. App. 1998).
· cites it 16× “Under Minn.Stat. § 604.02, subd. 1 (1996), can Kmart be held hable for more than four times the percentage of fault allocated to it by the jury? III.”
Staab v. Diocese of St. Cloud, 830 N.W.2d 40 (Minn. Ct. App. 2013).
· cites it 31× “Here, we are presented with the question of how to apply the reallocation provision of Minn. Stat. § 604.02 (2012). Appellant Diocese of St.”
— Minn. Stat. § 604.02(1) — 4 cases
— Minn. Stat. § 604.02(2) — 1 case
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.