- 15 -
report as to damages, describes injuries other than to various
aspects of their business. In the letters of petitioners'
attorney that summarized the mediation, there is only one mention
of personal injury: his assertion that the personal injury
exception to the stipulation of the parties applied only to
physical personal injury. That assertion postdates the release
and fails to explain the absence of a similar exception in the
release. However, even if we were to assume that the release
contained such an exception, that would not establish that any
claim for personal injuries was made by petitioners. It only
would establish that no claim for “personal injury” (whatever
that term was intended to mean) was settled. There is still no
evidence that a claim for personal injury was made during the
lawsuit.3 Our examination of the mediation and settlement
negotiations reinforces our belief that a claim for personal
injuries was not raised in the suit and not addressed by du Pont
in the settlement negotiations (except as noted with respect to
the personal injury exception).
3 The only place that we noted where petitioners asserted a
claim that may be a personal injury is in a letter to a private
claims adjuster hired by du Pont before commencement of the
lawsuit, in which they described their loss of friends who were
also customers and their belief that they appeared as "lying,
deceiving fools to our customers". That claim never was made
within the context of the lawsuit, and petitioners have failed to
convince us that, when the release was executed, du Pont had in
mind any claim that had been made for personal injuries within
the meaning of sec. 104(a)(2).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011