Stewart

Stewart v. Preston Pipeline Inc.

Caution
134 Cal. App. 4th 1565·2005 Cal. App. LEXIS 1947·2005 Daily Journal DAR 14681·36 Cal. Rptr. 3d 901·2005 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 10743
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 20, 2005H028333California10,432 words

Opinion

Opinion

Duffy, J.

As an encouragement to the open communication essential to successful settlement discussions, the Evidence Code, and in particular Evidence Code section 1119 makes inadmissible any statements, writings, or other communications made in connection with mediation. We consider here whether this broad mediation confidentiality statute may be used by a settling party as a shield to prevent the admission of a purported settlement document signed at the conclusion of mediation in subsequent proceedings to enforce the settlement.

Plaintiff Darren Stewart sued as a result of personal injuries he sustained when his vehicle collided with a backhoe that fell off a truck owned by defendant Preston Pipeline Inc., and driven by defendant George Solinger (collectively, defendants). The dispute proceeded to mediation. At the conclusion of the mediation, a document—signed by plaintiff, plaintiff’s attorney, and defendants’ attorney—purported to memorialize a settlement and recited that the parties intended the settlement to be enforceable and exempt from certain confidentiality provisions of the Evidence Code. Plaintiff thereafter refused to accept the settlement check. Defendants brought…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.