Emilio M. Kosrovani, V. Roger Jobs Motors, Inc.
80400-6
| Wash. Ct. App. | Jul 6, 2021Background
- Kosrovani (pro se plaintiff; an attorney) sued Roger Jobs Motors, Inc. (RJM) for alleged neurological injuries; trial court granted summary judgment for RJM and Kosrovani appealed.
- While the appeal was pending, the parties mediated and signed a CR 2A "Memorandum of Settlement" calling the matter settled for $15,000, conditioned on execution of a full release, dismissal of the lawsuit, and withdrawal of the appeal.
- Kosrovani refused to sign the release or withdraw the appeal; RJM drafted a Release that included an indemnification/subrogation clause Kosrovani had not agreed to.
- RJM moved in the trial court to enforce the CR 2A settlement; the trial court struck the indemnification clause, ordered Kosrovani to sign the amended release, dismiss the case, and withdraw the appeal, and denied reconsideration.
- On appeal, this Court retroactively granted the trial court permission under RAP 7.2(e) to enter the postjudgment enforcement order and affirmed enforcement of the settlement; the underlying summary-judgment appeal was dismissed as moot.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court lacked jurisdiction to enter an enforcement order while appeal pending under RAP 7.2(e) | Trial court lacked authority because RJM did not obtain this court's permission before formally entering an order that would affect an appeal | RAP 7.2(e) permits trial courts to hear postjudgment motions; permission from appellate court was appropriate and would have been granted | Appellate court retroactively granted permission under RAP 1.2 and declined reversal; enforcement order validly entered |
| Whether the CR 2A settlement was unenforceable because Kosrovani’s attorney did not sign | Absent counsel’s signature, the CR 2A requirements are unmet and the agreement is unenforceable | Kosrovani signed the written agreement himself while represented; party signature suffices where party assents in writing | Court held Kosrovani’s signature manifested assent; lack of attorney signature did not defeat CR 2A enforcement |
| Whether the settlement was merely conditioned on execution of the release (no binding agreement) | The phrase "conditioned upon execution of a full release" shows no binding agreement until release signed, so no enforceable settlement exists | The memorandum states the matter "has been settled" and contemplates Kosrovani’s promise to execute the release; failure to sign breached that promise | Court construed the memorandum as a binding agreement obligating Kosrovani to execute the release; his refusal breached the settlement |
| Whether omission of an indemnification/subrogation term from the CR 2A memorandum renders the settlement ambiguous or unenforceable | Because the later Release included an indemnification term not discussed in mediation, material terms were missing and no enforceable agreement existed | Parties agreed to dismissal, withdrawal of appeal, and a general release; indemnification was not part of the negotiated terms and could be removed | Court struck the indemnification clause as not agreed to, enforced the remaining settlement terms, and ordered Kosrovani to sign the amended release |
Key Cases Cited
- Condon v. Condon, 177 Wn.2d 150 (2013) (CR 2A enforcement principles and effect of dismissal with prejudice)
- Spokane Research & Def. Fund v. City of Spokane, 155 Wn.2d 89 (2005) (mootness doctrine)
- In re Patterson, 93 Wn. App. 579 (1999) (party signature can satisfy CR 2A where parties sign directly)
- Brinkerhoff v. Campbell, 99 Wn. App. 692 (2000) (moving party bears burden to show no genuine dispute over settlement terms)
- Hearst Commc’ns, Inc. v. Seattle Times Co., 154 Wn.2d 493 (2005) (contract interpretation focuses on objective manifestations of intent)
- Ebsary v. Pioneer Human Servs., 59 Wn. App. 218 (1990) (nonparty claims may require special considerations when settlements affect third-party rights)