- 13 -
does not list "tort". Yet, in the very next sentence, the
Settlement Agreement in paragraph 2, clause (4) above with
respect to Philips (another party to the suits) specifically
releases all "tort" claims. We view this as another indication
that the Green/FBC and WNIC suits were based on contract, not on
tort.
Thus, we do not believe that WNIC entered into the
Settlement Agreement with the intention of settling a tort or
tort type claim with respect to petitioner. Instead, we believe
that WNIC intended to terminate any and all contractual
relationships between petitioner and FBC.
Our position is further strengthened upon a review of the
other evidence before us. Prior to the District Court trial,
WNIC made a Motion in Limine to preclude petitioner from
injecting into trial matters which WNIC believed were irrelevant,
inadmissable, and prejudicial. WNIC sought to prevent petitioner
from introducing evidence of the kind normally associated with
tort claims and to limit the case to contractual matters. The
District Court granted WNIC's motion, and directed petitioner to
limit his presentation to a claim of breach of contract.
Petitioner's attorney acquiesced. Although petitioner initially
alluded to tort type claims in petitioner's complaint, the case
proceeded to trial before the Jury to determine whether a breach
of contract had occurred. It therefore follows that the Jury's
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011