- 22 -
The parties exchanged several drafts of various settlement
agreements before they reached a final agreement. After
negotiated changes, Ormet and Mr. Boyle both believed as did Mr.
Bradley that there was a binding settlement of all relevant
issues when the Settlement Term Sheet was executed. Mr. Bradley
states in his opening brief: “Parties to a term sheet agree to
the conditions set forth in the term sheet and to that extent it
is considered binding with respect to those particular items.”
The Settlement Term Sheet, dated August 7, 1995, was signed
by the parties. Petitioner (based on the Stanwich fax machine
date on the base of the document and the date of Mr. Bachman’s
cover sheet correspondence) appears to have signed the Settlement
Term Sheet on August 8, 1995, Boyle and Ormet on August 8 or 9,
and Signal on or after August 8, 1995, probably August 11, 1995.
Of particular note was the demand by Mr. Boyle and Oralco
that the settlement result in a complete resolution and release
of any and all claims known or unknown at the time of settlement.
Mr. Bachman credibly testified regarding the August 7, 1995,
Settlement Term Sheet and whether he remembered any controversy
over the release between himself and Mr. Conner. He stated:
“No, I remember that if there was going to be a settlement here,
it would be a settlement. I mean, as I said, real, imagined,
current, historical, future, and as broad as you can define the
release.” It is not surprising or unusual that broad general
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011