Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-07-01401/USCOURTS-ca8-07-01401-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 

---

1

The Honorable Fernando J. Gaitan, Jr., Chief Judge, United States District

Court for the Western District of Missouri. 

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 07-1401

___________

Lorraine Black, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Western District of Missouri.

Sam’s Club, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellee. *

___________

Submitted: February 7, 2008

Filed: February 29, 2008

___________

Before MURPHY, COLLOTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Lorraine Black appeals from the district court’s1

 order enforcing a settlement

agreement in her employment-discrimination action. For reversal, she argues that she

never signed an agreement, and that during the mediation the mediator misled and

intimidated her, and counsel for Sam’s Club took advantage of her mental condition

and pro se status. 

Appellate Case: 07-1401 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/29/2008 Entry ID: 3407979
-2-

Upon review of the record, we conclude that the district court did not clearly

err in finding that Black had entered into a settlement agreement. See Chaganti &

Assocs., P.C. v. Nowotny, 470 F.3d 1215, 1221 (8th Cir. 2006) (standard of review),

cert. denied, 127 S. Ct. 2977 (June 18, 2007) (No. 06-1377). The record shows that

during mediation, Black agreed without equivocation to settle the case and similarly

agreed to the terms of settlement. See Visiting Nurse Ass’n, St. Louis v. VNA

Healthcare, Inc., 347 F.3d 1052, 1054-55 (8th Cir. 2003) (if parties’ manifestations

produce reasonably ascertainable objective meaning, enforceable agreement exists;

fact that party later decides contract is not to its liking does not provide reason to

suppose contract was not in fact formed). Nothing in the record supports Black’s

claims of misconduct by the other participants. See Tiburzi v. Dep’t of Justice, 269

F.3d 1346, 1355 (Fed. Cir. 2001) (bare allegation by party that he was coerced into

signing settlement agreement is insufficient to set aside settlement agreement; party

must make showing of wrongful conduct). 

Further, under Missouri contract law--which applies in this case--settlement

agreements need not be in writing, and courts may enforce an oral settlement

agreement that contemplates a release being signed later. See Byrd v. Liesman, 825

S.W.2d 38, 39 (Mo. Ct. App. 1992); cf. Chaganti, 470 F.3d at 1221 (unless subject

matter is governed by statute of frauds, court may enforce oral settlement agreement

that contemplates execution of documents at later time; basic principles of contract

law govern existence and enforcement of alleged settlement). 

Accordingly, we affirm. 

______________________________

Appellate Case: 07-1401 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/29/2008 Entry ID: 3407979