Kendrick v. Barker

15 P.3d 734 (2001)

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

P filed suit for injuries she received when her vehicle collided with a D tractor-trailer. On June 8, 1999, P's attorney faxed to D's attorney and the mediator P's acceptance of '$40,000.00 in full settlement of all claims against D.' P's attorney also notified the district court, and the trial setting was vacated. After P received the document drafts, she notified her attorney that she would not accept the settlement and hired a new attorney. D filed a motion seeking enforcement of the settlement agreement. P contended in part that on July 19, 1999, after the settlement conference, she was diagnosed with a closed head injury, and she argued that mutual mistake precluded enforcement of the agreement. D contended that in Wyoming mutual mistake was inapplicable. The court ruled that a preponderance of the evidence showed that an oral settlement agreement without contingencies was reached. It held because Wyoming did not recognize a tort theory of mutual mistake, which the trial court understood to be different from mutual mistake in contract law, summary judgment was granted to D. P appealed.