 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Nyman v. B & B Quality Homes8/2/2005
eeding unless such agreement or stipulation be made in open court, or in presence of the clerk, and entered in the minutes by him, or signed by the party against whom the same is alleged, or his attorney.
Here, the parties did not agree on the record, and although an exchange of e-mail and correspondence exists, no settlement agreement was formally signed by Ms. Nyman or her attorney. Thus, our focus is whether its purport is undisputed.
For the purport of an oral agreement to be undisputed, the material terms must be undisputed. Lavigne, 106 Wn. App. at 19. Remorse, second thoughts, and unexpressed expectations do not warrant setting aside an otherwise binding agreement. Id. In the absence of a written contract, a binding agreement exists only where the subject matter has been agreed upon, the terms are all stated in the agreement, and the parties intended a binding agreement prior to the time of signing and delivery of a formal contract. Morris v. Maks, 69 Wn. App. 865, 869, 850 P.2d 1357 (1993).
Here, the record shows the parties agreed to settle their dispute for $15,000 on March 10, 2004. Afterwards, B&B forwarded the settlement and release agreement to Ms. Nyman. When Ms. Nyman objected to some of the terms in the agreement, B&B changed the terms in Ms. Nyman's favor. Her attorney then stated in his March 30 e-mail to B&B's attorney that Ms. Nyman would sign the release agreement prepared by B&B and modified by Ms. Nyman upon the receipt of the $15,000. On April 6, Ms. Nyman's attorney notified B&B's attorney that if the check was sent immediately he would strike Ms. Nyman's motion to confirm the settlement. The next day, the check was sent and Ms. Nyman's counsel struck the motion, evidencing the parties had reached an agreement. Based on the undisputed facts, the parties formed a binding agreement including all material terms under the standard set forth in Morris.
As this court previously noted in Lavigne, ''the compromise of litigation is to be encouraged.'' Lavigne, 106 Wn. App. at 19 (quoting In re Marriage of Ferree, 71 Wn. App. 35, 39, 856 P.2d 706 (1993)). Ms. Nyman's apparent second thoughts are insufficient to evade her binding agreement.
Based on the above, the trial court erred in denying B&B's motion to enforce the settlement.
Reversed.
A majority of the panel has determined this opinion will not be printed in the Washington Appellate Reports, but it will be filed for pubic record pursuant to RCW 2.06.040.
Brown, J.
WE CONCUR:
Kato, C.J.
Kurtz, J.
|