California Court of Appeal

Reset A A Font size: Print

Myerchin v. Family Benefits, Inc., G038569

In a settlement dispute case wherein plaintiff asserted that a written settlement agreement entered into was unenforceable because defendant's attorney had continued to negotiate it with him directly, even after becoming aware he had retained counsel, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where: 1) the alleged evidence of direct negotiation, even if true, was insufficient, as a matter of law, to demonstrate that the settlement agreement was the product of duress, unconscionable, or rendered void or unenforceable as a matter of public policy; and 2) plaintiff's failure to make any effort to rescind the agreement, specifically by not offering to refund money received in consideration of the settlement, precluded his assertion that the agreement could not be relied upon to defeat his claim.

Appellate Information

  • Decided 04/22/2008
  • Published 05/20/2008

Judges

Court

  • California Court of Appeal

Counsel

  • For Appellant:
  • DesJardins & Panitz and Eric A. Panitz, Long Beach, for Plaintiff and Appellant.

  • For Appellees:
  • Law Office of Rick Augustini and Rick Augustini, for Defendant and Respondent.
Copied to clipboard