CHRISTOPHER ZACARIAS
v.
ALAYM AGUILAR
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.
Preliminary negotiations do not establish a sufficient manifestation of mutual assent to create an enforceable settlement agreement.
[1] A settlement agreement must be sufficiently specific and mutually agreeable as to every essential element to be judicially enforceable.
[2] Where parties fail to reach agreement as to the character, nature, or type of release to be used, an essential element of a settlement agreement is not established.
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“Preliminary negotiations do not establish a sufficient manifestation of mutual assent to create an enforceable settlement agreement.”
Cited from Vision Palm Springs, LLLP v. Michael Anthony Co., 272 So. 3d 441, 444 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019)
Christopher Zacarias appealed a decision from Miami-Dade County Court involving a dispute with Alaym Aguilar. The case involved questions regarding se…
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 Settlement Agreement Enforceability cases and more on FLexlaw
Opinion filed May 8, 2024. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D23-0310 Lower Tribunal No. 20-12242 CC
________________
Christopher F. Zacarias,
Appellant,
vs.
Alaym Aguilar, et al.,
Appellees.
An appeal from the County Court for Miami-Dade County, Lawrence D. King, Judge. Neil Rose, for appellant. Xander Law Group, P.A., and Wayne R. Atkins, for appellee Alaym Aguilar. Before FERNANDEZ, MILLER, and LOBREE, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See § 471.003(2)(e), Fla. Stat. (2023) (“Employees of a firm, corporation, or partnership who are the subordinates of a person in responsible charge, licensed under this chapter [are not required to be licensed as a licensed engineer].”); § 471.031(1)(b)(3), Fla. Stat. (“Any person who is exempt from licensure under s[ection] 471.003(2)[(e)] may use the title or personnel classification of ‘engineer’ in the scope of his or her work under that exemption if the title does not include or connote the term ‘professional engineer,’ ‘registered engineer,’ ‘licensed engineer,’ ‘registered professional engineer,’ or ‘licensed professional engineer’ and if that person is a graduate from an approved engineering curriculum of [four] years or more in a school, college, or university which has been approved by the board.”); see also Vision Palm Springs, LLLP v. Michael Anthony Co., 272 So. 3d 441, 444 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019) (“Preliminary negotiations do not establish a sufficient manifestation of mutual assent to create an enforceable settlement agreement.”) (citing Jaffe v. Jaffe, 147 So. 3d 578, 581 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014)); Williams v. Ingram, 605 So. 2d 890, 893 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) (noting settlement agreement “must be sufficiently specific and mutually agreeable as to every essential element” to be judicially enforceable); Cheverie v. Geisser, 783 So. 2d 1115, 1119 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (“Where the language of a release is disputed and the parties fail to reach an agreement as to the character, nature, or type of release to be used, an essential element of the agreement is not established.”).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Williams v. Ingram, 605 So. 2d 890 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)
- Solanje Cheverie v. Geisser, 783 So. 2d 1115 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)
- Jaffe v. In re Guardianship of Michael Ross Jaffe, 147 So. 3d 578 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014)