NEIL LEFF AND PHYSICIANS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS CORPORATION, APPELLANTS,
v.
STEVEN ECKER, M.D., APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A party cannot avoid a contract based on mutual mistake if they bore the risk of the mistake by entering the agreement with limited knowledge.
Defendants appeal an order denying their motion to enforce a settlement agreement reached after mediation. The plaintiff argued mutual mistake regardi…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
PER CURIAM.
Defendants, Neil Leff and Physicians Financial Consultants Corporation, appeal an order denying their renewed motion to enforce settlement agreement. We reverse.
We are not persuaded by the plaintiffs argument that mutual mistake allows him to avoid the parties’ agreement, reached after a mediation conference. A party may avoid a contract by proving mutual mistake regarding a basic assumption underlying the contract. Rawson v. UMLIC VP, L.L.C., 933 So. 2d 1206, 1210 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006). However, to prevail on this basis the party must also show he did not bear the risk of a mistake. Id. A party to an agreement bears the risk of a mistake when “he is aware, at the time the contract is made, that he has only limited knowledge with respect to the facts to which the mistake relates but treats his limited knowledge as sufficient.” Rawson, 933 So. 2d at 1210 (citing Restatement (Second) of Contracts, § 154 (1979)).
In this case the record amply establishes that plaintiff went into the mediation conference without a clear picture of what the policy limits were for the incidents in question. In fact, this was plaintiffs first question at mediation. Notwithstanding this limited knowledge, plaintiff chose to go ahead with the mediation and entered into an agreement at the end thereof. Despite his admitted suspicions about the policy limits, plaintiff made the decision to enter into the agreement.
The doctrine of mutual mistake was not created to relieve litigants of agreements entered into improvidently. The all-out efforts plaintiff later engaged in to go behind the policy and ascertain, without question, what policies applied and what policy limits were, could have been performed before the mediation. The situation in this appeal would have been avoided.
Based on the foregoing, we reverse the order and remand for entry of an order enforcing the settlement agreement.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
In re Standard Jury Instructions-Contract & Bus. Cases, 116 So. 3d 284 (Fla. 2013)…AUTHORITIES FOR 416.25 1. “A party may avoid a contract by proving mutual mistake regarding a basic assumption underlying the contract. However, to prevail on this basis the party must also show he did not bear the risk of mistake.” Leff v. Ecker, 972 So. 2d 965, 966 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (citation omitted). 2. “A party bears the risk of a mistake when (a) the risk is allocated to him by agreement of the parties or (b) he is aware, at the time the contract is made, that he has only limited knowledge with resp…
-
Moralinda Rachid v. Omaira Torres Perez, 26 So. 3d 70 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)…nnot demonstrate that there was “no negligence or want of due care” on her part because she had an obligation to read and know the legal parameters regarding the validity and application of the prenuptial agreement prior to mediation. Leff v. Ecker, 972 So. 2d 965 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (holding that where the plaintiff entered into a mediated settlement agreement with a limited knowledge of the relevant facts, the plaintiff bore the risk of mistake). Additionally, Rachid was represented by counsel at mediation,…
Authorities Cited
- Rawson v. Umlic VP, L.L.C., 933 So. 2d 1206 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)