Settlement Agreements Revisited
As an update to my post on securing your settlement agreement, there is one more point to note: if you want the court to address certain issues that may depend on the existence of an admission of liability, it must be contained in the settlement agreement. In Iron Head Construction, Inc. v. Gurney, the Utah Supreme Court reviewed a situation in which the parties settled their contract dispute but expressly agreed that pre-judgment interest would be determined by the district court. The Supreme Court reversed an award of pre-judgment interest and the court of appeals. Here are the highlights:
“where the settlement does not rest on a finding or contain a stipulation of liability and damages against a party, prejudgment interest is unavailable.”
“The settlement amount cannot properly be characterized as an award of damages for which prejudgment interest should be awarded.”
Add this to your arsenal. Be very careful what you agree to in the heat of battle or negotiations.
- Secure Your Settlement by Putting it in Writing
- Utah Supreme Court Apportions Medical Expenses in Worker’s Compensation Cases
- Proposed Federal Civil Rule Changes: Rules 26 (experts) and 56 (summary judgment)
- Pleasant Grove Prevails in Summum “Seven Aphorisms” Monument Dispute
- Honorable David Kent Winder, Federal District Court Judge Passed Away May 19, 2009
- Secure Your Settlement by Putting it in Writing
- Utah Supreme Court Apportions Medical Expenses in Worker’s Compensation Cases
- Proposed Federal Civil Rule Changes: Rules 26 (experts) and 56 (summary judgment)
- Pleasant Grove Prevails in Summum “Seven Aphorisms” Monument Dispute
- Honorable David Kent Winder, Federal District Court Judge Passed Away May 19, 2009