MARY FAIN
v.
BORIS LUIS SOCA
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.
The court affirmed the lower court's decision, upholding enforcement of a settlement agreement reached through mediation against a party's challenge. The appellant failed to establish duress or other valid grounds to set aside the agreement.
The court held that a party cannot defend against enforcement of a written settlement agreement on the ground that they failed to read it prior to execution, absent circumstances that prevented reading or fraudulent inducement to refrain from reading. Failure to review a contract before signing is not a valid defense against its enforcement.
[1] In a motion to set aside a settlement agreement reached through mediation, the inquiry is limited to whether there was fraud, misrepresentation in discovery, or coercion.
[2] A party to a written contract cannot defend against its enforcement on the ground of failure to read it unless the party shows facts indicating circumstances that prevent…
Previewing 2 of 2 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“The inquiry on a motion to set aside an agreement reached through mediation is limited to whether there was fraud, misrepresentation in discovery, or coercion.”
Griffith v. Griffith, 860 So. 2d 1069, 1074 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)
A party to a mediated settlement agreement sought to set aside the agreement. The party challenged enforcement of the written settlement agreement, ap…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Duty To Read Contract cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Derejtova, Inc. v. Ray Corp., 857 So. 2d 304 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003) (holding trial court properly dismissed the underlying action with prejudice and enforced the parties’ settlement agreement where appellant failed to make a prima facie showing of duress); Griffith v. Griffith, 860 So. 2d 1069, 1074 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (“The inquiry on a motion to set aside an agreement reached through mediation is limited to whether there was fraud, misrepresentation in discovery, or coercion”) (quoting Crupi v. Crupi, 784 So. 2d 611, 612 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)). See also All Florida Sur. Co. v. Coker, 88 So. 2d 508, 510 (Fla.1956) (“A party to a written contract cannot defend against its enforcement on the ground that he signed it without reading it, unless he avers facts showing circumstances which prevented his reading the paper, or was induced by the statements of the other parties to desist from reading it. The courts will not ordinarily protect those who with full opportunity to do so will not protect themselves”) (quotation omitted);
Santana v. Miller, 314 So. 3d 346, 349 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020) (“It is well-established the failure to review and read a contract prior to its execution is not a defense against its application”); Moreno v. First Int'l Title, Inc., 176 So. 3d 301, 302-03 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015) (“[A] party who signs his name to an instrument cannot deny its contents on the ground that he signed it without reading it unless he shows facts indicating circumstances which prevented his reading it.”)
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- ALL Fla. Sur. Co. v. Coker, 88 So. 2d 508 (Fla. 1956)
- Sluder v. State, 860 So. 2d 1069 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)
- Crupi v. Crupi, 784 So. 2d 611 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)
- Derejtova, Inc. v. RAY Corp., Inc., 857 So. 2d 304 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003)
- Viviana Santana v. Miller, 314 So. 3d 346 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020)
- Moreno v. First Int'l Title, Inc., 176 So. 3d 301 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015)