Woods v. Gamache, 1204--III
| Decision Date | 30 December 1975 |
| Docket Number | No. 1204--III,1204--III |
| Citation | 544 P.2d 144,14 Wn.App. 685 |
| Parties | James F. WOODS and Ellen J. Woods, husband and wife, Appellants, v. Virgil W. GAMACHE et al., Respondents. |
| Court | Washington Court of Appeals |
David K. Crossland, Ivy, Elofson, Vincent, Hurst & Crossland, Yakima, for appellants.
Robert R. Redman, Gavin, Robinson, Kendrick, Redman & Mays, Yakima, for respondents.
Plaintiffs, James and Ellen Woods, brought suit for personal injuries suffered by James as a result of an automobile accident with Jocelyn M. Gamache. Defendants answered admitting the negligence of Jocelyn but affirmatively alleging that James executed a release for any and all claims known or unknown sustained as a result of the accident. In reply, plaintiffs alleged: (1) the release was void because it was based upon a mutual mistake of fact as to the true nature of James' injury, and (2) defendants' agent falsely represented the release and engaged in inequitable and deceitful conduct in securing it. The trial court upheld the release. Plaintiffs appeal. We affirm.
The unchallenged findings of fact disclose: (1) on September 22, 1972, James signed an unambiguous release in the presence of defendants' representative in exchange for the sum of $2,647.75; (2) the release discharged defendants from any further liability for injuries to James whether the injuries were known or unknown; (3) prior to the execution of the release, James submitted to defendants' representative a medical report prepared by his doctor which indicated that the injury to James' left knee was only a bruise or contusion; (4) the only medical information available to defendants on September 22, 1972 came from James' physician; (5) defendants and their representative had no independent knowledge or information about James' physical condition or injuries; (6) after signing the release, James developed further problems in the left knee which eventually required surgery; (7) while James was limited in education and general intelligence, he was neither illiterate nor without sufficient comprehension to understand the nature and significance of the release; (8) defendants' representative made no statement or representation of fact or law for the purpose of inducing James to sign the release; (9) James did not sign the release because of or in reliance upon any statement made by defendants' representative; and (10) there was no indication of any deceit practiced on or...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bennett v. Shinoda Floral, Inc.
...where, at the time of the release, the parties were mistaken about future development of a known injury. In Woods v. Gamache, 14 Wash.App. 685, 686-87, 544 P.2d 144 (1975), where the plaintiff signed a release knowing his knee was injured, and further problems developed in the knee after th......
-
Vanderpool v. Grange Ins. Ass'n, 52366-5
...released all, courts have not applied the rule when it was clear that the parties intended otherwise. Likewise in Woods v. Gamache, 14 Wash.App. 685, 544 P.2d 144 (1975), in an opinion authored by Judge McInturff, a release discharged the defendants from further liability for injuries wheth......
-
Horgan v. Industrial Design Corp.
...Corp., 140 Mont. 564, 374 P.2d 96, 98 (1962). The law favors the amicable, good faith settlement of claims, Woods v. Gamache, 14 Wash.App. 685, 544 P.2d 144 (1975), and the encouragement and preservation of such settlements "constitute strong arguments for enforcing releases," Witt v. Watki......
- Benhart v. Gorham