Madeline A. Coblenz and William J. Mason - Page 13

                                       - 13 -                                         
          the alleged misconduct of * * * [First City Bank] and alleging              
          actual and consequential damages in an unspecified amount”.                 
          Petitioner’s attorneys requested that the language “Mason                   
          believes that * * * [First City Bank’s] conduct damaged his                 
          business reputation” (business reputation sentence) be included             
          in the Recitals section of the final settlement agreement.                  
          Because the FDIC attorney did not find petitioner’s belief                  
          relevant, he permitted the inclusion of the business reputation             
          sentence in the final settlement agreement.                                 
               In the Consideration section of the final settlement                   
          agreement, the parties released each other from any claims that             
          each had against the other.  With regard to the scope of the                
          settlement agreement, however, the parties stated that the                  
          “release is limited to those claims, demands, rights and causes             
          of action with respect to acts, omissions, transactions,                    
          practices, conduct, facts or circumstances arising from (1) the             
          subject matter of the Recitals, (2) the subject matter of the               
          Mason Lawsuit, (3) the Mason Note and (4) the Mason Guaranty”               
          (scope provision).  The scope provision similarly appeared in the           
          September 10, 1995, draft of the final settlement agreement.                
               The parties did not allocate the $550,000 petitioner                   
          received from the FDIC (settlement proceeds) to any specific                
          claim by petitioner.  After attorney’s fees and litigation                  
          expenses, petitioner received a net amount of $266,686.                     

Page:  Previous  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011