## Facts

- Linda E. Maloney was treated for years by Maurice Prendergast, M.D., and also received radiology services connected to Richard E. Brennan, M.D., and related medical entities.
- In 1988, an x-ray showed a scapular abnormality and recommended further clinical correlation; no follow-up investigation was ordered and the finding was not discussed with the patient.
- Later imaging in 1991 and 2001 again showed the lesion, but it was not timely worked up.
- In 2002, imaging revealed a large right scapular mass diagnosed as osteogenic sarcoma with lung metastasis; Linda Maloney died in 2005 after treatment.
- Max C. Maloney (individually and as estate administrator) sued multiple defendants for negligent failure to diagnose and treat, including physicians and medical entities alleged to be vicariously liable.
- In October 2006, Maloney executed a joint tortfeasor release that discharged Brennan and various institutional defendants (including entities associated with Prendergast) and included broad language releasing “all other persons,” but also expressly reserved rights to pursue claims against Prendergast.

## Issues

1. Whether a joint tortfeasor release that discharges a physician’s employers and contains broad “all other persons” language nevertheless releases the physician when the release expressly reserves claims against that physician.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania affirmed the Superior Court and held the release did not discharge Dr. Prendergast.
- The Court ruled the reservation-of-rights clause was effective and controlled over general release language.
- The Court held summary judgment for Prendergast and his practice entities was improper and the claims could proceed.

## Legal Principles

- A release is construed under ordinary contract principles, with the parties’ intent determined from the writing as the primary consideration.
- A specific, express reservation of rights against a particular alleged tortfeasor is enforceable even if the release discharges other joint tortfeasors and includes broad “all other persons” boilerplate.
- Specific negotiated provisions control over general language; courts should not interpret a release to render an express reservation meaningless.
- Releasing parties alleged to be vicariously liable does not, by itself, extinguish direct claims against an employee-tortfeasor when the release expressly preserves those claims.
- The historic “release one, release all” rule does not override clearly expressed intent in a modern joint-tortfeasor release.

## Conclusion

The court held that a plaintiff may release certain defendants, including an alleged tortfeasor’s employers, while preserving claims against a specifically identified physician when the release clearly and expressly reserves those rights, notwithstanding broad general language releasing unnamed persons.


Maloney v. Valley Med. Facilities, Inc., 984 A.2d 478 (Pa. 2009)