Summary
noting that "[c]ourts should not summarily enforce [or disregard] a settlement agreement, in the absence of an evidentiary hearing, where material facts concerning the existence or terms of an agreement to settle are in dispute," and instructing the district court to conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine whether additional terms in a settlement agreement were material and therefore constituted a counteroffer (second alteration in original) (quoting Maya Swimwear Corp. v. Maya Swimwear, LLC , 855 F. Supp. 2d 229, 234 (D. Del. 2012) )
Summary of this case from Salter v. MoyaOpinion
No. 69238
03-10-2017
The STATE of Nevada, ON RELATION OF its DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, Petitioner, v. The EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF the STATE of Nevada, IN AND FOR the COUNTY OF CLARK; and the Honorable Kenneth C. Cory, District Judge, Respondents, and Wykoff Newberg Corporation, a Nevada Corporation; and International Smelting Company, a Nevada Corporation, Real Parties in Interest.
Sylvester & Polednak, Ltd. Lambrose Brown, PLLC Hejmanowski & McCrea LLC
GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.