Willing. Mall, Ltd. v. 240/242 Franklin Avenue, LLC
24 A.3d 802
| N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. | 2011Background
- Willingboro Mall agreed to sell Lot 7.01, Block 2 on Willingboro map to Festival, with indemnification obligations including municipal fines.
- Foreclosure filed in 2005 for alleged defaults; defendants answered disputing the default.
- Parties mediated on November 6, 2007; a settlement was reached and memorialized in letters dated November 9, 2007 and escrowed funds arranged.
- Plaintiff refused to consummate the settlement; defendants moved to enforce the mediated agreement in December 2007 with an offer of judgment in February 2008.
- Four-day plenary hearing in 2009; judge found the settlement reached at mediation was binding and not coerced.
- Appeal and cross-appeal followed on enforceability of the oral agreement and on attorney’s fees; the appellate court affirmed enforcement and denied fee relief.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether oral mediation settlement can be enforced | Willingboro argues Rule 1:40-4(i) requires writing at mediation and confidentiality prevents enforcement. | Defendants contend settlement terms were reduced in writing within a few days and confidentiality waiver allows enforcement. | Yes; enforceable with waiver of confidentiality and written memorialization within a short period. |
| Effect of waiver of mediation confidentiality | Confidentiality prevents enforcement of oral terms absent waiver. | Parties waived confidentiality, allowing enforcement and discovery of settlement details. | Waiver permits enforcement of the oral mediation agreement. |
| Compliance with Rule 1:40-4(i) writing requirement | The rule requires contemporaneous writing with signatures at mediation. | Delayed memorialization within days is permissible and writing need not occur during the session. | Delayed writing memorializing the agreement is permissible. |
| Whether the agreement was the product of coercion | Settlement was coerced by mediator influence. | Trial judge found the witness credible and not coerced. | No coercion; assent was voluntary and credible. |
Key Cases Cited
- Weichert Co. Realtors v. Ryan, 128 N.J. 427 (N.J. 1992) (settlement enforceability and essential terms)
- Bistricer v. Bistricer, 231 N.J. Super. 143 (App. Div. 1987) (enforcement of settlements with terms sufficient)
- Berg Agency v. Sleepworld-Willingboro, Inc., 136 N.J. Super. 369 (App. Div. 1975) (enforceability of settlement terms)
- Wolkoff v. Villane, 288 N.J. Super. 282 (App. Div. 1996) (coercion in settlements not favored for enforceability)
- Peskin v. Peskin, 271 N.J. Super. 261 (App. Div. 1994) (enforceability considerations in settlement contexts)
- Beazer East, Inc. v. The Mead Corp., 412 F.3d 429 (3d Cir. 2005) (mediation confidentiality limits on enforceability; waiver matters)