(citing Feuer v. Menkes Feuer, Inc., 8 A.D.2d 294, 299, 187 N.Y.S.2d 116 (N.Y.App.Div.1959)). However, if the indemnitor does receive notice of the underlying action, “the general rule is that the indemnitor will be bound by any reasonable good faith settlement the indemnitee might thereafter make.” Deutsche Bank Tr. Co. of Ams. v. Tri-Links Inv. Tr., 74 A.D.3d 32, 39, 900 N.Y.S.2d 246 (N.Y.App.Div.2010) (quoting Coleman v. J.R.’s Tavern, 212 A.D.2d 568, 568, 622 N.Y.S.2d 334 (N.Y.App.Div.1995)). “[T]he test of reasonableness applies not to the fact of liability but only to the amount that may be paid by way of settlement of such liability.” Feuer, 8 A.D.2d at 299, 187 N.Y.S.2d 116; see Luria Bros. & Co. v. Alliance Assurance Co., Ltd., 780 F.2d 1082, 1091 (2d Cir.1986) (<HOLDING>). The Defendants and the Plaintiff support
holding that an indemnitees settlement must be in an amount reasonable in view of the size of possible recovery and degree of probability of claimants success against the indemnitee quoting damanti v as inger 314 f2d 395 397 2d cir1963 cert denied 375 us 834 84 sct 46 11 led2d 64 1963 holding uncharged acts of violence evidence of  the background of the charges the parties familiarity with one another and their concert of action  quoting united states v oleary 739 f2d 135 136 3d cir1984 cert denied 469 us 1107 105 sct 782 83 led2d 776 1985 cert denied 493 us 821 110 sct 78 107 led2d 44 1989 holding that the most critical factor in the analysis of a reasonable fee is the degree of success obtained recognizing that in the civil context willful conduct  may  indicate a reckless disregard for obvious or known risks  quoting monday v united states 421 f2d 1210 1215 7th cir cert denied 400 us 821 91 sct 38 27 led2d 48 1970 holding that a change in law does not affect the res judicata effect of judgments citing chicot county drainage dist v baxter state bank 308 us 371 375 60 sct 317 319 84 led 329 rehg denied 309 us 695 60 sct 581 84 led 1035 1940