- 14 -
reason for which Mr. Rodman paid petitioner the settlement amount
at issue.
On the record before us, we find that Mr. Rodman’s dominant
reason in paying the settlement amount at issue was to compensate
petitioner for his claimed physical injuries relating to the
incident.5 Our finding is supported by the settlement agreement,
a declaration by Mr. Rodman (Mr. Rodman’s declaration),6 and Ms.
Pearson’s testimony.
The settlement agreement expressly provided that Mr.
Rodman’s payment of the settlement amount at issue
releases and forever discharges * * * [Mr.] Rodman
* * * from any and all claims and causes of action of
any type, known and unknown, upon and by reason of any
damage, loss or injury * * * sustained by Amos [peti-
tioner] arising, or which could have arisen, out of or
in connection with * * * [the incident].
Mr. Rodman stated in Mr. Rodman’s declaration that he entered
into the settlement agreement “to resolve any potential claims”
and that the settlement agreement was intended to resolve peti-
tioner’s “claim without having to expend additional defense
costs.” The only potential claims of petitioner that are dis-
closed by the record are the potential claims that petitioner had
5As discussed below, Mr. Rodman paid a portion of the set-
tlement amount at issue on account of other secondary reasons.
6The parties introduced into evidence a declaration by Mr.
Rodman, who did not appear as a witness at trial. The parties
stipulated the accuracy and truthfulness of Mr. Rodman’s state-
ments in that declaration.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011