2, is applied first. Under the joint-liability statute, when parties are jointly liable, they are generally jointly and severally liable for the entire award. Minn.Stat. § 604.02, subd. 1 (2002). Nonetheless, if one party’s equitable obligation is uncollectible, another party may move for reallocation within one year of the judgment. Id., subd. 2. In that circumstance, the district court “shall determine whether all or part of a party’s equitable share of the obligation is uncol-lectible from that party and shall reallocate any uncollectible amount among the other parties, including a claimant at fault, according to their respective percentages of fault.” Id.; Hosley v. Armstrong Cork Co., 383 N.W.2d 289, 292-93 (Minn.1986); see also Gregor v. Clark, 560 N.W.2d 744, 745 (Minn.App.1997) (<HOLDING>). The canons of statutory construction answer
holding that intent to evade collective bargaining obligations is merely one factor among many that must be considered holding that failure to pay obligations under a contract is a material breach as a matter of law when parties explicitly state in the contract that failure to pay warrants termination holding that those who poison the land must pay for its cure holding that a court must reallocate all uncollectible obligations among tortfeasors who can pay holding that it was not an abuse of discretion to require a defendant to pay all back taxes