I need to preserve a defendant in a case where I am settling with two of the defendants.Do you have some release language to do that?
Answer:You just need to sign a release naming the defendants you mean to settle with and dismiss with prejudice as to those defendants only. This will keep your claim open as to other, unnamed defendants or tort-feasors. Moss v. City of Oklahoma City,1966 OK 2, 410 P.2d 52, holds that unnamed tort-feasors are not released, even if the release says something like "and all other persons." You also need to be careful you don't release someone principally liable, meaning to keep open your claim as to someone secondarily liable, such as releasing an agent and then trying to pursue the principal (Barsh v. Mullins, 1959 OK 2, 338 P.2d 845;Mid-Continent Pipeline Co. v. Crauthers, 1954 OK 61, 267 P.2d 568) or release the primary tort-feasor and try to pursue someone statutorily jointly and severally liable (Burke v. Webb Boats, Inc., and Arrowhead, 2001 OK 83, 37 P.3d 811).

Client is EMT in back of ambulance when hit by tortfeasor. After settling with the tortfeasor he finds out EMSA has UM that covers employees. UM now denies coverage saying that its subrogation was destroyed by the settlement and release. Client did not know of the employer’s coverage at time of settlement and release with tortfeasor. EMSA notified its carrier of the accident and of injury to an employee but the insurance did not notify the employee of the policy benefit. They have filed an MSJ and response due shortly.

Answer: Check out Phillips v. New Hampshire Ins. Co., 263 F.3d 1215 (10th Cir. 2001). Facts are very much like yours: employee didn't know about employer's UM coverage. Tenth Circuit held the employee didn't give up the employer's UM by releasing tortfeasor because he didn't know there was UM.

If I settle auto liability and UM claims, does a general release bar a dram shop action against another defendant? Or should I insist on language reserving the claim against the bar?

Answer: I think you are OK without the specific reservation, although I don’t see how it hurts to use it. See:Moss v. City of Oklahoma City, 1995 OK 52, 897 P.2d 280, 288: “we join those courts that hold for a general release like those present here to discharge from liability potential tortfeasors not parties to the release the language contained in the release must expressly designate by name or otherwise specifically identify such other potential tortfeasors.”

Individual quickly settled his claim pro se with tortfeasor's carrier, then discovered he really was significantly injured after all. Now wants to know if there's anything I can do for him, despite the release he signed.

Answer: Read: Holmes v. MKTRR Co., 1978 OK 6, 574 P.2d 297: Error to grant summary judgment for Defendant where evidence indicates release entered into contemplated full recovery, while fact was injuries were permanent and serious.

Campbell, James K., Torts: Avoidance of Releases of Liability for Personal Injury, 49 OBJ 882 (1978)

These authorities are a bit dated but the Bar Journal article is pretty comprehensive and when brought up to date will, I think, answer your questions.