San Diego Law Review
Document Type
Comments
Abstract
This Comment examines the history of California's "good-faith" settlement law and the sliding scale agreement in light of the California Supreme Court's decision in Tech-But v. Woodward-Clyde, which required more than mere non-collusion for a settlement to be in "good faith." The author examines the policies underlying settlements by joint tortfeasors and suggests that sliding-scale agreements have minimal value in our legal system. The author further argues that these agreements continue to be used, contrary to the policy objectives delineated in Tech-But. The author concludes with legislative proposals to maximize economic fairness to non-settling tortfeasors while encouraging equitable settlements.
Recommended Citation
Marianne Shipp,
California's Sliding Scale Settlement Agreements - Finality instead of Fairness,
23
San Diego L. Rev.
227
(1986).
Available at:
https://digital.sandiego.edu/sdlr/vol23/iss1/9