Douthwright v. Northeast: Difference between revisions
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
m (DeRien moved page Douthwright v. Northeast Corridor Foundations to Douthwright v. Northeast: shorten) |
Lost Student (talk | contribs) m (Updated timeline for new template) |
||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
Consequently, in February 2001 Douthwright filed a motion for a default judgment for $1.5 million + interest. | Consequently, in February 2001 Douthwright filed a motion for a default judgment for $1.5 million + interest. | ||
{{Timeline| | {{Timeline|'''Northeast sent Douthwright a $1.5 million check'''|25 April 2001|May 8, 2001|at evidentiary hearing, the trial court gave for Douthwright in the amount of $40,931.45 in interest}} | ||
|issues=Is the '''accord-&-satisfaction''' doctrine enforceable only in the context of a good-faith dispute about the amount of an unpaid debt? | |issues=Is the '''accord-&-satisfaction''' doctrine enforceable only in the context of a good-faith dispute about the amount of an unpaid debt? | ||
|arguments=After the payment of $1 million & the $1.5 million, Northeast argued that it had sent Douthwright an [https://www.quimbee.com/keyterms/doctrine-of-accord-and-satisfaction accord & satisfaction] letter. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/accord_and_satisfaction | |arguments=After the payment of $1 million & the $1.5 million, Northeast argued that it had sent Douthwright an [https://www.quimbee.com/keyterms/doctrine-of-accord-and-satisfaction accord & satisfaction] letter. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/accord_and_satisfaction | ||
Latest revision as of 04:17, December 16, 2023
| Douthwright v. Northeast | |
| Court | Connecticut Appellate Court |
|---|---|
| Citation | 805 A.2d 157 |
| Date decided | September 17, 2002 |
Facts
A concrete pylon fell off a truck & crushed Mr. Douthwright ("Douthwright")'s leg.
Procedural History
- Northeast Corridor Foundations ="Northeast" = 1 of the defendants
Douthwright sued several defendants for money damages in a Connecticut state court.
The opposing parties reached an oral agreement to pay Douthwright $3.2 million. The insurers of Northeast were supposed to pay Douthwright $2.5 million upfront.
In return, Douthwright withdrew his lawsuit in January 2001. Next, Northeast's insurer paid Douthwright $1 million. Northeast's other insurer refused to pay the remaining $1.5 million.
Consequently, in February 2001 Douthwright filed a motion for a default judgment for $1.5 million + interest.
25 April 2001
Northeast sent Douthwright a $1.5 million check
May 8, 2001
at evidentiary hearing, the trial court gave for Douthwright in the amount of $40,931.45 in interest
Issues
Is the accord-&-satisfaction doctrine enforceable only in the context of a good-faith dispute about the amount of an unpaid debt?
Arguments
After the payment of $1 million & the $1.5 million, Northeast argued that it had sent Douthwright an accord & satisfaction letter. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/accord_and_satisfaction
Holding
Yes. A debtor may invoke the accord-&-satisfaction doctrine only if there's a good-faith dispute about the debt amount.
Holding was in favor of Douthwright. In this case, the accord-&-satisfaction letter didn't have a legal effect to discharge the interest obligation of Northeast.Judgment
Affirmed in favor Douthwright
