# Killeen v. Reinhardt

> Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · August 6, 1979 · 71 A.D.2d 851

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5835532

## Case

- **Full name:** John J. Killeen, as Administrator of the Estate of Catherine E. Killeen v. Henry G. Reinhardt, and Community Hospital at Glen Cove, Appellant-Respondent
- **Court:** Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
- **Decided:** August 6, 1979
- **Citations:** 71 A.D.2d 851; 419 N.Y.S.2d 175; 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13108
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Suozzi
- **Judges:** Suozzi
- **Cited by:** 21 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5835532

## Opinion text

Suozzi, J. P.,
concurs in the result, with the following memorandum: I am in full accord with the majority’s holding that the judgment entered in favor of plaintiff and against defendant hospital in the principal sum of $275,000 must be reversed and a new trial granted. However, I disagree with so much of the dicta which states that the trial • court correctly calculated the amount by which the verdict against the hospital, i.e., $650,000, had to be reduced due to plaintiff’s settlement of the case against the remaining defendants, Doctors Reinhardt, Nichlas and Muojo. Since Doctors Reinhardt and Nichlas paid $265,000 in settlement, which exceeded their equitable share of the damages (i.e., 30% of the $650,000 or $195,000), *854 the trial court correctly ruled, pursuant to section 15-108 of the General Obligations Law, that the verdict had to be reduced by the greater of those figures, i.e., $265,000, leaving a verdict of $385,000. For the same reasoning, however, once plaintiff settled his case against defendant Muojo for no consideration—and the majority concedes that such a settlement does not take the matter out of the purview of section 15-108 of the General Obligations Law—the defendant hospital was entitled to a further reduction in the verdict by an amount representing Muojo’s equitable share of the damages, i.e., 20% of $650,000 or $130,000 and not $110,000 as held by the trial court and approved by the majority.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5835532. Public record. Not legal advice.