Richard L. Dehart and Phoebe D. Dehart, His Wife, D/B/A Dehart Oil Company v. Richfield Oil Corporation, a Corporation

Good Law
395 F.2d 345·1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 6851
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 21, 196821597California1,583 words

Opinion

Opinion

Byrne, J.

This appeal is one more step in a running battle between these parties. The problems are all traceable to various business arrangements apparently commenced in 1956 whereby appellee’s petroleum products were to be distributed through appellants’ filling stations. In 1960 the appellants commenced a lawsuit in the Federal Courts alleging certain antitrust violations by the appellee and others. That lawsuit was settled by the then attorney for the appellants and agreements were drawn up. The appellants, however, refused to sign the agreements on the ground that their attorney had exceeded his authority. The appel-lee then cross-complained for enforcement of the agreement. The Court found that the attorney had the necessary settlement authority and ordered the appellants to sign the various documents which were part of the memorandum agreement. Included among these documents was a broadly worded general release. The appellants signed the documents. No appeal was taken from the judgment in that earlier case.

In 1965 appellants brought the present suit against the appellee for breach of contract. There seems to be no disagreement that this cause of action arose from the same dealings…

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.