law-settlement-extinguishes-contribution-claim be settling party against non-settling party


the settlement of the Pools' claims against the Allstate defendants extinguished any potential contribution
claims by those parties. See Beech Aircraft Corp. v. Jinkins, 739 S.W.2d 19, 22 (Tex. 1987) (contribution
claim by settling tortfeasor against non-settling parties prohibited); see also Jackson v. Freightliner Corp.,
938 F.2d 40, 41-42 (5th Cir. 1991) (Texas law) (settling tortfeasor cannot assign plaintiff his rights of
contribution and indemnity against a joint tortfeasor).
JOE POOL AND LESLIE POOL v. GALLE, INC.; from Travis County; 3rd district
(Galle, Inc. v. Pool
03-07-00619-CV, 262 SW3d 564, 08-29-08, pet. denied Jun 2009) (fraudulent
misrepresentation)(mold litigation, trial court erred by not applying settlement credit amount of damages
awarded against nonsettling party)(
extinguishment of contribution claim against nonsettling
party)(one-satisfaction rule)
Consequently, under the one-satisfaction rule, Galle was entitled to a credit for the Allstate settlement
unless the Pools could meet their burden of presenting evidence allocating the settlement amounts to
separate rather than joint damages. Casteel, 22 S.W.3d at 391-92. Because they failed to do so, the
entire settlement amount must be applied against the jury's breach-of-contract award. Because the
settlement amount exceeds the amount of the damage award, the Pools must take nothing on their
breach-of-contract theory.
We accordingly sustain Galle's issue, reverse the district court's judgment, and render judgment that the
Pools take nothing on their claims against Galle.