## Facts

- In August 2006, Ryan Botticello allegedly assaulted Christopher (Chris) Steele while Chris was married to Eryn M. Steele.
- In March 2008, Chris sued Ryan Botticello and Ryan’s father, Robert Botticello, seeking damages for Chris’s injuries.
- Chris’s complaint did not assert a loss-of-consortium claim on Eryn’s behalf, and Eryn was not a party to the case.
- Eryn knew about Chris’s injuries and knew the lawsuit was pending, but she did not participate in the litigation or in settlement negotiations.
- Chris settled his personal-injury case with the Botticellos (through their insurer) and executed a release of his claims.
- After the settlement, Eryn filed a separate lawsuit against Ryan and Robert Botticello asserting loss of consortium based on harm to the marital relationship allegedly caused by the assault.
- Eryn and Chris later divorced.
- The trial court granted the Botticellos’ motion for summary judgment, concluding that Eryn’s consortium claim was barred by Chris’s settlement and release.
- Eryn appealed to the Maine Supreme Judicial Court (Law Court).

## Issues

1. Whether an injured spouse’s settlement and release of a personal-injury claim bars the other spouse’s loss-of-consortium claim when the spouse was not a party to, and did not sign, the settlement or release.

## Decision

- The Law Court vacated the summary judgment for the defendants and remanded.
- The court held that Chris’s settlement and release did not preclude Eryn from pursuing her loss-of-consortium claim because she was not a party to the settlement or release.
- The court rejected the trial court’s reading of prior “derivative” language as allowing an injured spouse to extinguish the other spouse’s separate consortium claim by unilateral release.

## Legal Principles

- A loss-of-consortium claim is a cause of action belonging to the noninjured spouse and seeks compensation for injury to the marital relationship, not merely additional damages for the injured spouse’s bodily harm.
- The consortium claim is “derivative” only as to liability: if the defendant is not liable to the injured spouse for the underlying tort, the consortium claim generally fails; however, the claim remains separate as to ownership and settlement.
- A settlement and release is a contract and does not bind a nonparty or extinguish that person’s independent claim absent assent, authority, or another basis recognized by contract or agency law.
- Brown v. Crown Equipment Corp. (addressing workers’ compensation exclusivity) does not establish a general rule that a private release by an injured spouse automatically bars the other spouse’s consortium claim outside that statutory setting.

## Conclusion

Steele v. Botticello holds that, in Maine, an injured spouse’s settlement and release of a personal-injury claim does not bar the other spouse’s separate loss-of-consortium action when the spouse did not join, sign, or authorize the release; the trial court’s summary judgment based on release was therefore vacated and the case remanded.


Steele v. Botticello, 21 A.3d 1023 (2011)