- 17 -
quietly. By virtue of Millipore’s manner of discharge, petitioner
was humiliated. And petitioner’s mental anguish was so severe that
he considered suicide.
We are mindful that pursuant to paragraph 3 of the agreement,
Millipore denied that petitioner suffered personal injuries or that
it bore any responsibility for causing them. In our opinion, this
disclaimer is merely boilerplate language; that is, standard
operating procedure for a settlement.
Although we do not believe that the entire $750,000 was paid
for personal injury as recited in the agreement, see infra, we are
satisfied that the agreement was in other respects entered into in
an adversarial setting, at arm’s length, and in good faith. Hostile
negotiations ensued; these negotiations were undertaken in the
parties’ good faith belief that they had to either resolve their
bona fide dispute or litigate petitioner’s claims. See, e.g., Taggi
v. United States, 35 F.3d 93, 96 (2d Cir. 1994). Millipore wanted
to limit its financial exposure. Mr. Nunes took into consideration
(a) what it was going to cost Millipore to defend petitioner’s
claim, (b) what was the likelihood of Millipore’s losing, and (c)
what the maximum cost to Millipore would be if it lost. He was more
concerned about the dollar cost to Millipore than the merits of
petitioner’s claims.
We conclude that, from Millipore’s viewpoint, the $750,000
settlement was partly attributable to a desire to avoid a lawsuit
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011