In any action or claim for damages for personal injury a party asserting that the limitations on liability set forth in this article do not apply shall allege and prove by a preponderance of the evidence that one or more of the exemptions set forth in subdivision one of section sixteen hundred one or section sixteen hundred two applies. A party asserting limited liability pursuant to this article shall have the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence its equitable share of the total liability.
§ 1603.Burdens of proof
Article 16. Limited Liability of Persons Jointly Liable · Last amended 1996 · Last verified July 21, 2026
In one sentenceCPLR 1603 assigns the burden of proof for Article 16 disputes: the party claiming an exception applies must prove it by a preponderance of the evidence, and the party invoking the several-liability cap must prove its equitable share the same way.
Full Text of CPLR 1603
Plain-English Summary
Article 16 raises two separate factual questions in every case where it might apply: does one of CPLR 1601 or 1602's exceptions take the case out of the cap, and if not, what is the capped defendant's equitable share? CPLR 1603 assigns the burden for each.
Anyone arguing that an exception applies -- that the case falls under one of CPLR 1602's carve-outs, or under the jurisdiction-based exception in CPLR 1601 -- has to allege and prove it by a preponderance of the evidence. Separately, a defendant seeking the protection of the cap has to prove their own equitable share of the total liability, also by a preponderance of the evidence. Neither side gets the benefit of the doubt; both burdens require affirmative proof.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who has the burden of proving an exception to the several-liability cap applies?
Who proves a defendant's equitable share under Article 16?
The defendant asserting limited liability under CPLR 1601 has the burden of proving their equitable share of the total liability by a preponderance of the evidence.
What standard of proof applies to CPLR 1603 disputes?
A preponderance of the evidence applies to both burdens the section creates -- proving an exception applies, and proving a defendant's equitable share.
Does a plaintiff or a defendant carry the burden under CPLR 1603?
It depends on what's being proved. Whoever asserts a fact -- the claimant arguing an exception applies, or the defendant arguing for the cap -- carries the burden on that specific point.
Why does CPLR 1603 matter in practice?
Because the several-liability cap is not automatic, a defendant who wants its protection has to affirmatively prove an equitable share at trial, and a claimant who wants to avoid the cap has to affirmatively prove an exception applies.
Amendment History
Add, L 1986, ch 682, § 6; amd, L 1996, ch 635, § 8, eff Sept 10, 1996.
Source & verification. Provision text, History, and Advisory
Committee Notes are reproduced verbatim from the Consolidated Laws of New York.
Last verified July 21, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as: burden of proof several liability New Yorkequitable share burden of proofCPLR 1603 preponderance of evidenceproving several liability exceptionCPLR 1603 burdens of proofwho proves equitable share New York