- 284 - VII. Enforceability of Piggyback Agreements Petitioners contend that the piggyback agreements executed by nontest case petitioners should be set aside on the ground that Messrs. Sims and McWade fraudulently induced nontest case petitioners to execute piggyback agreements by misrepresenting the status of the Thompson and Cravens cases.115 In the alternative, petitioners contend that the piggyback agreements should be set aside on the ground that Messrs. Sims' and McWade's failure to disclose the Thompson and Cravens settlements before the trial of the test cases resulted in a breach of contract. Mr. Sticht contends that enforcement of the piggyback agreements would result in manifest injustice on the ground that Messrs. Sims and McWade used the piggyback agreements as a means to proceed to trial under what Mr. Sticht calls the "sporting theory of justice". Mr. Sticht raised additional contract arguments in posttrial Motions for Release From Piggyback Agreement that he filed on behalf of nontest case petitioners Richard B. and Donna G. Rogers, Anthony E. and Carol A. Eggers, and John L. and Terry E. 115 Nontest case petitioners Ronald L. and Mattie L. Alverson executed their piggyback agreement in June 1985--well before Mr. McWade had negotiated the Thompson and Cravens settlements. Nontest case petitioners Anthony E. and Carol A. Eggers, John L. and Terry E. Huber, Stanley C. and Sharon A. Titcomb, and Richard B. and Donna G. Rogers executed piggyback agreements in late November 1986--about the time that Mr. McWade began settlement discussions with Messrs. Thompson and Cravens. Nontest case petitioners Norman W. and Barbara L. Adair executed their piggyback agreement in March 1987--well after Mr. McWade had negotiated the Thompson and Cravens settlements.Page: Previous 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011