Munroe v. U.S. Food Service, 1D07-1941.
Decision Date | 27 June 2008 |
Docket Number | No. 1D07-1941.,1D07-1941. |
Citation | 985 So.2d 654 |
Parties | Ainsley MUNROE, Appellant, v. U.S. FOOD SERVICE and Ace American Insurance, Appellees. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Bram J. Gechtman of Downs, Brill, & Whitehead, Coral Gables; Marjorie Gadarian Graham of Marjorie Gadarian Graham, P.A., Palm Beach Gardens, for Appellant.
David P. Carugati of Hinshaw & Culbertson, LLP, Miami, for Appellees.
Claimant Ainsley Munroe appeals from an order enforcing a settlement agreement with the employer, U.S. Food Service, and carrier, Ace American Insurance (the E/C). We conclude that the document at issue was not a completed settlement agreement, and reverse.
Munroe was injured at work on April 11, 2006. Claimant and the E/C entered into mediation, and the mediator issued the following Mediation Settlement Agreement Report:
Contingent upon employer/carrier approval, the parties agree to a total settlement of $30,000, out of which claimant will pay attorney fees + costs of $5000. Claimant will net $25,000.
E/C has 20 days for the contingency. If e/c does not approve of $30,000, claimant has option of accepting $25,000 total with $5000 to attorney + therefore [$]20,000 to claimant net.
Claimant agrees to sign a General Release + Voluntary Resignation.
E/C agrees to authorize physical therapy until Judge signs order.
(Emphasis added.) It was signed by Munroe, his attorney, and the E/C's attorney. Munroe retained a new lawyer who sent a letter to the E/C two days later stating that Munroe had opted out of the mediation agreement. The carrier replied eleven days later that the E/C had obtained "$30,000.00 in settlement authority," thus satisfying the contingency in the settlement agreement, and asserted that "the agreement is enforceable as the contingency was not mutual."
The judge of compensation claims granted the E/C's motion to enforce, concluding as a matter of law that the parties had entered into a binding agreement.
Interpretation of settlement agreements is governed by contract law, and whether an agreement constitutes a valid contract is a matter of law subject to de novo review. See Gunderson v. Sch. Dist. of Hillsborough County, 937 So.2d 777, 779 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006). Conditioning a contract upon approval by one of the parties shows that a binding contract has not yet been formed. See Meekins-Bamman Prestress, Inc. v. Better Constr., Inc., 408 So.2d 1071, 1073 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982) (); Rudolph v. Lewis, 418 So.2d 296, 297 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982) ( ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
D.R. v. Fla. State Bd. of Educ.
...are not without recourse as their agreement is enforceable in state court and would be governed by state contract law. See Munroe v. U.S. Food Serv., 985 So.2d 654. 655 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008). Furthermore, the parents are free to request a due process hearing if the School Board does not provi......
-
Ohio Nat'l Life Assurance Corp. v. Jones
...of the Marital Settlement Agreement. Contract law governs the interpretation of settlement agreements. Munroe v. U.S. Food Serv., 985 So. 2d 654, 655 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008). In interpreting a contract, a court is "guided first by the language of the contract itself and where the contrac......
-
Basner v. Bergdoll
...law, and whether an agreement constitutes a valid contract is a matter of law subject to de novo review." Munroe v. U.S. Food Serv. , 985 So. 2d 654, 655 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008). "Summary judgment is proper only if (1) no genuine issue of material fact exists, viewing every possible inference i......
-
Bonagura v. Home Depot
...1st DCA 2002). "[W]hether an agreement constitutes a valid contract is a matter of law subject to de novo review." Munroe v. U.S. Food Serv., 985 So.2d 654 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008). Applying the law of contracts, the JCC, as the fact-finder, had to whether a valid, binding settlement agreement w......
-
Enforcement of workers' compensation settlements.
...the MSA were not resolved. Therefore, the parties' alleged settlement agreement was not enforceable. In Munroe v. ACE American Insurance, 985 So. 2d 654 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008), the mediation report Contingent upon employer/carrier approval, the parties agree to a total settlement of $30,000, o......