Joint and Several Liability

Joint and several liability is a theory of recovery that permits the plaintiff to recover damages from multiple defendants collectively, or from each defendant individually. In a state that follows the rule of joint and several liability, if a plaintiff sues three defendants, two of whom are 95% responsible for the defendant’s injuries, but are also bankrupt, the plaintiff may recover 100% of her damages from the solvent defendant that is 5% responsible for her injuries.

The Problem

The rule of joint and several liability is neither fair, nor rational, because it fails to equitably distribute liability. The rule allows a defendant only minimally liable for a given harm to be forced to pay the entire judgment, where the co-defendants are unable to pay their share.

ATRA’s Position

ATRA supports replacing the rule of joint and several liability with the rule of proportionate liability. In a proportionate liability system, each co-defendant is proportionally liable for the plaintiff’s harm. For example, a co-defendant that is found by a jury to be 20% responsible for a plaintiff’s injury would be required to pay no more than 20% of the entire settlement. More moderate reforms that ATRA supports include: (1) barring the application of joint and several liability to recover non-economic damages; and (2) barring the application of joint and several liability to recover from co-defendants found to be responsible for less than a certain percentage (such as 25%) of the plaintiff’s harm.

Search Through ATRA Reforms

Search through all of ATRA's reforms around Joint and Several Liability
Joint and Several Liability Reform: Proposition 2 (1988).

Bars application of the rule of joint and several liability in the recovery of all damages.

Alaska
Joint and Several Liability Reform: SB 1089 (2002).
Bars application of the rule of joint and several liability in the recovery of all damages, except when a defendant has: (1) been found liable for int...
Pennsylvania
Joint and Several Liability Reform: SB 1131 (2011).
Bars the application of the rule of joint and several liability in the recovery of all damages, except when a defendant has: (1) been found liable for...
Pennsylvania
Joint and Several Liability Reform: H. 3008 (2005).
Provides that joint and several liability does not apply to defendants less than 50 percent responsible of the total fault. In the calculation of tota...
South Carolina
Joint and Several Liability Reform: Medical Liability: S. 83 (2005).
Specifies that if there are multiple defendants in a civil action, joint and several liability does not apply to any defendant 50 percent or less resp...
South Carolina
Joint and Several Liability Reform: SB 263 (1987): S.D. Codified Laws Ann. § 15-8-15.1.
Provides that “any party who is allocated less than 50% of the total fault allocated to all parties may not be jointly liable for more than twice the ...
South Dakota
Joint and Several Liability Reform: McIntyre v. Balentine, 833 S.W.2d 52 (Tenn. 1992).

Bans application of the rule of joint and several liability in the recovery of all damages.

Tennessee
Joint and Several Liability Reform: S.B. 56 (2013)
Codifies current state law by providing that if multiple defendants are found liable in a civil action governed by comparative fault, a defendant shal...
Tennessee
Joint and Several Liability Reform: SB 5 (1987).
Bars application of the rule of joint and several liability in the recovery of all damages from defendants found to be less than 20% at fault, except ...
Texas
Joint and Several Liability Reform: SB 28 (1995).

Bars application of the rule of joint and several liability in the recovery of all damages from defendants found to be less than 51% at fault.

Texas


Joint and Several Liability News and Press

Explore ATRA's most recent press releases and blogs around Joint and Several Liability

South Carolina Governor Rallies Support for Key Legal Reform Package

Following Gov. Henry McMaster’s press conference today, momentum continues...

Search Resources

Search through all of ATRA's Amicus Briefs, Reports, and Other Resources around Joint and Several Liability
Search All
States
Status
Post Types
Date
Mead Johnson & Co. LLC v. Greear
(U.S., filed August 7, 2026): Arguing that the lower court’s holding on specific jurisdiction inexplicably ignores and conflicts with this Court’s de...
SCOTUS
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Lyle & Bruso v. State Farm
(Ok., filed July 9, 2026): Arguing that allowing the district court’s so-called “protective order” to stand would make Oklahoma a significant nationa...
Oklahoma
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Benavides v. Tesla
(11th Circ., filed July 9, 2026): Arguing that the judgment holds manufacturers to unreasonable standards that will deter innovation and development ...
11th Circuit
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Drake v. Bayer
(9th Circ., filed May 26, 2026): Arguing that rehearing should be granted to clarify the standards applicable to establishing class-wide injury.  The...
9th Circuit
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
In Re FirstEnergy Corp. Securities Litigation
(6th Circ., filed May 21, 2026): Arguing that Comcast’s limits on class certification provide essential protections for American businesses and inves...
6th Circuit
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Suncor Energy (U.S.A.) Inc. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County, et. al.
(U.S., filed May 18, 2026): Arguing the state law does not provide a mechanism to recover damages for costs attributed to global climate change. Clim...
SCOTUS
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Veto Request, House Bill 26-1236, “Arbitration Reform”
...
Colorado
Second Letter Urging Veto of HB 449 / SB 229 Following Rejection of Amendments
...
Virginia
Comment by Leading Defense Bar and Business Groups Opposing Nonlawyer Ownership and Fee-Sharing
Tennessee Supreme Court comment by leading business and defense bar groups opposing nonlawyer law firm ownership – 4.30.2026Download ...
Tennessee
Blade v. Sig Saurer
(E.D. Pa., filed April 6, 2026): Arguing that the court should grant Sig Saurer’s motion for reconsideration because Mallory upends the jurisdictiona...
Eastern District of Pennsylvania
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided



The American Tort Reform Association is the nation’s first organization dedicated exclusively to reforming the civil justice system through education and legislative enactment.

To receive occasional updates from ATRA, enter your email address:
By subscribing, you agree to our Privacy Policy and consent to receive updates.
© 2026 ATRA. All rights reserved.