- 8 -
and Mr. Murphy and Ms. Dragland represented petitioner
Praegitzer. After discussions between Mr. Lopez, Mr. Murphy, and
Justice Janes, a memorandum of agreement (the 12/12 agreement)
was typed at the urging of Justice Janes and was signed by Mr.
Lopez and Mr. Murphy. The 12/12 agreement was not signed by
petitioner Dawes or by petitioner Praegitzer. Justice Janes
signed the 12/12 agreement approving it “as a judicial
settlement.” Justice Janes stated to the attorneys that if they
encountered any problems, they were to come back to see him to
resolve the matter.
The memorandum of agreement, dated December 12, 1989,
provided as follows:
This appeal is settled this date upon the following
conditions:
1. The Respondent [petitioner Dawes] will pay in cash
$103,000 to Appellant [petitioner Praegitzer].
2. The Corporation will transfer rights to products
known as “303" and “306" including inventory and
equipment, the equipment determined as a forklift and a
binding machine, to the extent inventory is less than
$59,000, it will be made up by Respondent.
3. No royalties on products sold by Appellant after
this date (ok Lopez; ? George).
4. A three and a half year covenant not to compete in
the propellor shop business in Washington, Oregon,
California and Nevada.
5. Kathy Dawes to forgive judgments and cancelled
notes in the amount of $36,097.65 (method of
forgiveness to be determined jointly by counsels' tax
counsel.)
6. Corporation to forgive debt owed by Appellant in
the amount of $21,000.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011