## Facts

- Juliette Slack was injured in a traffic incident and sought chiropractic treatment; she submitted a claim for personal injury protection (PIP) benefits to her insurer, Farmers Insurance Exchange.
- Farmers referred Slack to Dr. Lloyd Lachow for an independent medical examination (IME) as part of the PIP claim process.
- Slack alleged that during the IME, Lachow sexually assaulted her and physically manipulated her neck in a way that exacerbated her injuries.
- Slack sued Lachow for intentional torts and sued Farmers for negligence and related claims based on its referral to Lachow; her husband, Brett Slack, asserted a loss-of-consortium claim against Farmers.
- Slack settled with Lachow before trial; Farmers designated Lachow as a nonparty at fault under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-21-111.5 for purposes of allocating liability.

## Issues

1. Whether Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-21-111.5 requires several-liability apportionment between a negligent defendant and an intentional tortfeasor (designated as a nonparty) when their conduct jointly causes an indivisible injury.
2. Whether the statute’s apportionment requirement applies to a spouse’s derivative loss-of-consortium claim.

## Decision

- The Colorado Supreme Court affirmed the court of appeals.
- The court held that § 13-21-111.5 requires allocation of fault among all tortfeasors—negligent and intentional—whose conduct contributes to an indivisible injury, including designated nonparties.
- The court held that a loss-of-consortium claim is derivative and is subject to the same percentage-of-fault reduction as the injured spouse’s damages.
- As applied, Farmers’ liability was limited to its percentage of fault, and Brett Slack’s consortium damages also had to be reduced by the nonparty’s allocated fault.

## Legal Principles

- Under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-21-111.5(1), a defendant is liable only for the portion of damages directly proportional to that defendant’s percentage of “negligence or fault.”
- The statutory term “fault,” used in addition to “negligence,” is construed broadly to include intentional tortious conduct, not only negligent conduct.
- The trier of fact must assign percentages of fault to parties and properly designated nonparties whose conduct contributed to the injury, and the defendant’s monetary liability is capped at its assigned percentage.
- Applying percentage-based several liability in mixed negligent/intentional cases implements the legislature’s abolition of joint and several liability.
- Loss-of-consortium damages are derivative of the underlying personal injury and are reduced in accordance with the same comparative fault allocation.

## Conclusion

Colorado’s comparative fault statute requires pro rata allocation of liability between negligent and intentional tortfeasors who together cause an indivisible injury, including nonparties at fault, and it mandates the same percentage-based reduction for a spouse’s derivative loss-of-consortium damages.


Slack v. Farmers Ins. Exch., 5 P.3d 280 (Colo. 2000)