Bridge City Family Medical Clinic, P.C., v. Kent & Johnson, Llp

346 P.3d 658 (2014)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Bunker, P's president, and Schafer, the adjuster on behalf of the PLF, exchanged several emails discussing a settlement. Bunker sent Schafer an email: I would like to discuss with you the option of a settlement. If there is a relatively reasonable but comparatively small amount of money that we could agree on to settle this matter I believe it would be mutually beneficial.' Schafer wrote, 'If you are interested in trying to resolve the claim for 'a comparatively small amount of money,' then I suggest you make a specific proposal that the PLF might consider.' Bunker emailed back, 'This is in response to your letter I received today. I am willing to settle this and move on for $40,000.' Schafer wrote the following: 'The PLF, on behalf of D, will pay P, the total sum of $10,000 in return for P's and your release of Ds. D also offers to release P and you from claims for reimbursement of $5,506.25 paid by D to Judicial Dispute Resolution, LLC on P's behalf after P failed to pay that bill. If settlement on these terms is acceptable, I will prepare the necessary Mutual Release. Bunker sent Schafer a short email stating, 'I am willing to meet you in the middle and settle this matter immediately for $20,000.' Bunker offered $13,500 and D's offer to release P and you from claims for reimbursement of the $5,506.25 paid by D to Judicial Dispute Resolution, LLC. Bunker rejecting the $13,500 offer and offered $19,000. Schafer increased PLF's offer to $15,000. Bunker rejected the offer and again offered $19,000. Schafer wrote back: 'The PLF and D accept your offer. Enclosed are duplicate originals of the Mutual Release I have prepared for your review and signature if it is acceptable. D have already approved it. Schafer instructed Bunker and P to sign the Mutual Release in the presence of a Notary Public and send one of the originals back. Schafer was to hold the check until he received a complete set of signed documents from P and D. P did nothing. Eventually, P's attorney sent Schafer a letter stating that P has decided not to settle on the terms set forth in your recent correspondence. P brought this case against Ds, alleging professional malpractice. Ds moved for summary judgment on the ground that the claim had been settled as a result of the communications between Bunker and Schafer. The court granted D's summary judgment motion and entered a judgment of dismissal. P appealed.