FI FTH DI VI SI ON

M CFA DDEN, P. J.

, GOBEI L and PI NSON, JJ.

N O T IC E : M otions for r e c ons i de r a tion m us t be

p h y sic a l ly r e ce iv ed i n our c le r k ’s offic e w ithin te n

da y s of the da te of de c is ion to be de e m ed tim e ly file d.

https ://w w w

. ga a ppe a ls .us /r ule s

June 22, 2022



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A 2 2 A 0 3 2 2

. P R O G R E S S I V E M O U N T A I N I NS UR A NC E

COM PANY v . BUTLER.

P I N S O N

, J u d g e.

Ern es t Bu t l er was i nju red i n a car acci d en t an d h i red co un s el t o as s is t wi t h h i s

p ers o n al -i n

ju ry cl ai m

. H i s co u ns el n eg o ti at ed a s et t l e m en t wi t h t h e d ri v er’ s i n s u rer

an d s en t a l et t er d o cu m en t i n g Bu t l er’ s accep t an ce o f t he i n s u rer’ s o ffer. Day s l at er,

Bu t ler fi red h is co u ns el

, an d h e l at er h i red an o th er at t o rn ey

, wh o t ri ed t o n eg o t i at e fo r

a h i g h er s et t l em en t am o u n t

. Th e i n s u rer fi l ed s u i t an d m o v ed t o en fo rce t h e set t l em en t

ag reem en t

, wh i ch Bu t ler cl ai m ed h ad been en t ered i n t o wi t h o u t h i s co n s en t

. Th e t ri al

co u rt d en i ed t h e m o t io n

, co n cl u d i n g t hat th e part i e s h ad n o t fo rm ed an en fo rceab l e

s et t l em en t ag reem en t

.W e rev ers e. Ev ery o n e ag rees th at th e in s u rer o ff e r e d t o s e t tl e fo r a s p eci fi c

d o l l ar am o u n t

, an d co u n s el ’ s l et t er u n e q u i vo cal l y accep t ed t h at o ffer wi t h o ut

i m p o s i n g an y ad di t i o n al co n d i t i o n s

. Th at is en o u g h t o fo rm an en fo rceab l e set t l em en t

a g r e e m e n t h ere, an d b ecau se t h e i n s u rer w as no t m ad e aware o f an y res t ri ct i o n s o n

t h e au t h o ri t y o f Bu t l er’ s co u n sel

, h er as s en t b o u n d Bu t l er. If Bu t l er di d no t au t h o ri ze

t h e s et tl em en t , h i s reco u rs e i s ag ai n s t t h e at t o rn ey

.

Back gro u n d

Th e fo l l o w i n g fact s are u n d i s p u t ed . In M arch 2 01 9

, Bu tl er was i n ju red wh en

h i s veh i cl e w as s i de-s wi p ed b y a t ract o r-t rai l er. Th e t ract o r-t rai l e r d ri v er, J u l io

M ad en

, was em

p l oy ed b y a co m m erci al m ot o r carri er, Carri er Co m p l i an ce Serv i ce,

wh i ch was i n s ured b y Pro g res s i v e

. Bu tl er ret ai n ed co u n s el

, wh o b eg an n eg o t i at i n g

wi t h Pro gres s i ve t o s et t l e t h e cas e.

O n J an u ary 2 2

, 2 0 2 0, Bu t l er’ s co u n s el

, Sarah J et t

, em ai l ed a Pro g res s i v e

rep res en t at i v e. Th e em ai l s t at ed : “ At t ach ed i s t h e h ol d h arm l es s l et t er. Pl eas e s en d t h e

ch eck an d s et t l em en t d o cu m en t s t o: [J et t ’ s l aw fi rm ’ s nam e an d ad d res s ] .” At t ach ed

t o t he em ai l was a l et t er s t at i n g :

Pl eas e al l o w th i s l et t er to co n fi rm t h at Ern es t Bu t l er accep t s Pro g res s iv e

M o u n t ai n In su ran ce Co m p an y ’ s o ffer o f $ 1 7,5 0 0 .0 0 as fu l l an d fi nal

2s et t l e m e n t o f t h e ab o v e-referen ced cl ai m

. Th i s s et t l em en t i s fo r th e

b o d i l y i n ju ry cl ai m ONLY. Pl eas e m ak e t h e ch eck p ay ab l e t o Ern es t

Bu t l er an d Th e L aw Offi ces o f G ary M art i n Hay s & A s s o ci a t e s

, P.C.

Fu rt her o u r fi rm ag rees t o ad d res s an y s tat u to ri l y v al i d l i en s fi l ed p ri o r

t o t h e d i s tri b ut i o n o f t h e s et t l em en t fu n d s

.

Th e l e t t er ag ai n as k ed Pro g res s i v e to fo rward t h e ch eck an d set t l em en t d o cu m en t s

t o J et t at t h e fi rm ’ s ad d res s

.

Ei g h t d ay s lat er, J et t sen t a l et t er t o Pro g res si v e s t at i n g th at h er fi rm no l o n g er

rep res en t ed Bu t ler an d g i v i n g n o t i ce o f an at to rn ey s ’ l i en her fi rm was p l aci ng o n an y

fu t u re s et t l e m e n t o r v erd i ct i n t h e cas e. Ab o u t a m o n th aft er th at

, Bu tl er’ s n ew

co u ns el s en t Pro g res si v e a l et t er o fferi ng t o s et t l e t h e cas e f o r $3 5 0 ,0 00

. Co u n s el

rep res en t i n g Carri er an d M ad en res p o n d ed wi t h a l et t er n o t in g t h at Bu tl er h ad al read y

ag reed t o s et t l e t h e cas e fo r $ 1 7,5 0 0 an d req u es t i n g in st ru ct i o n s fo r s u b m i t t i n g

p ay m en t an d s et t l em en t d o cu m en t s

.

Bu t l er d i d n o t res p o n d

, an d t wo m o n t h s l at er, Pro gres s i v e s u ed Bu t ler, s eek i n g

a d ecl arat o ry j u d gm en t s t at i ng t h at t h e p art i es h ad reach e d a b i nd i ng set t l em en t

ag reem en t

. Bu t l er an s wered

, d en y i n g t h at h e h ad ev er accep t ed a s et t l em en t o ffer an d

as s ert i n g t h at J et t h ad en gag ed in s et t l em en t n eg o t i at io n s wi t h ou t h i s co n s en t

.

Pro g res s i v e t h en m o v ed t o en fo rce t h e s et t l em en t ag reem en t

.

3Aft er a h eari ng

, th e t ri al co u rt en t ered an o rd er d en y in g th e m o t i o n t o en fo rce.

Th e co u rt fo u n d t h at J e t t ’s J an u ary 2 2

, 2 0 20 l et t er “ d i d n o t i ncl u d e an y s p eci fi c

t erm s ” an d was no t “ m ad e av ai l ab l e t o ” Bu t ler. Th e co u rt al s o fo u n d t hat J et t “ n ev er

recei v ed a fo rm al o ffer

, i n wri ti n g

, fro m [Pro g res s iv e] ”; t h at n ei t h er Bu t l er n o r Jet t

ev er “ s ig n ed an y rel eas e o f l i ab i l i ty ag reem en t o r ot h er s et tl em en t d o cu m en t s ”; an d

t h at Pro g res s i v e “ n ev er ag reed t o t h e term s ” i n J et t ’ s l et t er o r rem i t t ed an y p ay m en t

t o Bu t l er. Bas ed o n t h es e fi n d i n g s

, t h e co u rt co ncl u d ed t h a t t h e l e t t er w as n o t an

en fo rceab l e s et t l em en t ag reem en t

.

Pro g res si v e ap p eal ed

. 1

Di s cu ss i o n

1 Th e t ri al co u rt ’ s o rd er was a fi n al ap p eal ab l e ju d g m en t u n der OCGA § 5 -6 -3 4

(a) (1 ) b ecau s e i t res o l v ed t h e s o l e i s su e i n t h e cas e. See Tyr o n es v. Tyr o n es

, 3 0 0 Ga.

3 6 7

, 36 9 n .2 (7 9 2 SE2 d 3 9 8 ) (2 0 16 ) (n o t i ng t h at an o rd er i s co n s i d ered a f i n al

j u d g m en t wi t h in t h e m ean i n g o f OCGA § 5 -6 -3 4 (a) (1 ) “ wh ere i t l eav e s n o i s s u e s

rem ai n i n g t o b e res o l ved

, co n s t i t u t es t h e c o u rt ’ s fi n al ru l in g o n t h e m eri t s o f t h e

act i on

, an d l eav es t h e p art ies wi t h n o fu rt h er reco u rs e i n th e tri al co u rt ” (ci t at i o n an d

p u n ct u at i o n o m it t ed )). Cf. Un der wo o d v. Un d er wo o d

, 2 8 2 G a

. 6 4 3

, 64 4 (1 ) (6 5 1

SE2 d 7 3 6 ) ( 2 0 0 7 ) (h o ld i n g t h at an o rd er g ran t i ng a m o t i o n t o en fo rce a set t l em en t

ag reem en t i s n o t a fi nal ju dg m en t “ u n t i l s u ch t i m e as t h e ag reem en t ‘ h as b een m ad e

t h e ju d g m en t o f t h e co u rt

, th ereb y t erm i n at in g the lit i g at i o n ’ ”); Cl a xt o n v. Ad a ms

, 3 5 7

G a

. A p p

. 76 2

, 76 4 (1 ) (8 4 9 SE2 d 4 9 4 ) (2 0 20 ) (h o l d i ng t h at t ri al co u rt ’ s o r d e r

g ran t i n g m o t i o n t o en fo rce s et t l em en t ag reem en t was no t a fi n al j u d gm en t fo r ap p eal

p u rp os es ).

4Th e t ri al co u rt d eci ded t hi s cas e o n m o t i o n rat h er t h an by a ben ch t ri al

, s o “ t h e

i s su es r a i s e d i n t h i s ap p eal are an al o g o u s to th o s e i n a m o t i o n fo r s u m m ary

ju d g m en t [,] [an d ] [o ] u r rev i ew i s d e n o v o .” Jo n es v. F r i ckey

, 27 4 Ga. Ap p. 3 9 8

, 4 0 0

(6 1 8 SE2 d 2 9 ) (2 00 5 ) (ci t at i on an d p un ct u at io n o m it t ed ). Acco rd C u mb er l a n d

Co n t ra ct o r

s

, In c. v. S t a t e Ba n k a n d Tr u s t Co

. , 3 2 7 G a. Ap p

. 1 2 1

, 1 2 7 (3 ) (7 5 5 SE2 d

5 1 1 ) (2 0 14 ). Su m

m ary ju d g m en t i s p ro p er if t he p l ead in g s an d ev i d en ce o f reco rd

s h o w “ t h at t h ere i s n o gen u i n e i s s u e as t o an y m at eri al fact an d t h at t h e m ov i n g p art y

i s en t i t l ed t o a ju d g m en t as a m at t er o f l aw.” OCGA § 9 -1 1 -5 6 (c).

1

. W e s t art by d i s card i n g a p o ten t i al t h res h o l d b as i s fo r reject i ng th e set t l em en t

ag reem en t : J et t ’ s au t h o ri t y to s et t l e Bu t l er’ s cl ai m s. Al th o u g h Bu t l er h as m ai n t ai n ed

t h at h e di d n ot au t h o ri ze J et t t o ag ree t o Pro g res s i v e’ s o ffer, h e ack n o wl ed g es t h at h e

can n ot rel y o n t h at b as i s t o av o i d t h e ag reem en t

, b ecau s e J et t h ad ap p aren t au t h o ri t y

t o en t er i n t o a s et t l em en t ag reem en t

. See Br u mb el o w v. No r t h er n Pr o pa n e Ga s Co

. ,

2 5 1 Ga. 6 7 4

, 6 7 4-7 5 (2 ) (3 0 8 SE2 d 5 4 4 ) (1 9 8 3).

W e ag ree. Un d er Geo rg i a l aw, at t orn ey s h av e t h e a p p aren t au t h ori t y t o en t er

i n t o ag reem en t s o n beh al f o f t h ei r cl i e n t s

, an d t ho s e ag reem en t s are en fo rceab l e

ag ai n s t t h e cl i en t s b y o t h er s et tl i n g p art i es

. Br u mb el ow

, 2 5 1 Ga. at 6 7 4 ; s ee OCGA

§ 1 5 -1 9 -5

. Pu t an o t h er way

, u n l es s an o p p o s i n g p art y h as b een m ad e aware o f ex p res s

5r e s t ri ct i o n s o n t he at to rn ey ’ s au t h o ri t y t o s et t l e, th at au t h o ri t y “ m ay b e co n s i d e r e d

p l en ary by t h e co u rt an d op p o s i n g p art i es ,” an d t h e at t o rn ey ’ s as s en t to an ag reem en t

wi l l b i n d t h e cl i en t

. Id

. at 6 7 5

. If an at t o rn ey “ ov ers t ep [s ] th e b o u n d s of h i s ag en cy ”

i n neg o t i at i n g o n t h e cl i en t ’ s b eh al f an d reach es an ag reem en t h e d i d n o t au t h o ri ze,

t h e cl ien t ’s r e m e d y fo r t h at p ro b l em i s t o s eek red res s ag ai ns t t h e at t o rn ey

.

Br u m b el o w

, 2 5 1 Ga. at 6 7 5. Acco rd Bl an t o n v. Cr u mp Hea t in g & Ai r

, LLC

, 3 4 5 Ga.

Ap p . 4 8 8 , 4 9 1 (8 1 1 SE2 d 1 2 5 ) (2 0 1 8 ) (p h y si cal p reced en t o n ly ). J u s t s o h ere.

2

. Becau s e J et t had ap p aren t au t h o ri t y t o s et tl e h i s cl ai m s

, Bu t l er do es n o t rel y

o n her p u rp o rt ed l ack o f act u al au t h o ri t y t o at t ack th e s et t l em en t ag reem en t

. In s t ead

,

h e co nt en d s t h at J et t ’ s l et ter d i d n o t creat e a b i n d i n g s et tl em en t ag reem en t at al l

.

Set t l em en t ag reem en t s are su b ject t o “ t h e sam e req u i rem en t s o f fo rm at i o n an d

en fo rceab i li t y as o t h er co n t ract s .” Gr a n ge Mu t

. Ca s

. Co

. v. W o od a r d , 3 00 Ga. 8 4 8,

8 5 2 (2 ) (A) (7 9 7 SE2 d 8 1 4 ) (2 0 1 7 ) (ci t at i o n an d p u n ct uat i on o m i t ted ). Acco rd Jo n es

,

2 7 4 Ga. Ap p. at 4 01

. Th i s m ean s t h at an ag reem en t t o s e t t l e a p en d in g d i s p u t e i s

f o rm ed on ly “ w h en th e m i nd s o f t h e p art i es m eet at t h e s am e t i m e, u p o n t h e s a m e

s u b ject m at t er, an d i n t h e s am e s en s e.” Id

. (ci t at io n o m it t ed ). W h en an o ffer t o s et t l e

h as b een ex t en d ed

, an an s wer t o t h e o ffer wi l l am o u n t t o an accep t an ce o n l y i f i t i s

“ u n co n di t i on al an d i d en t i cal wi t h t h e t erm s o f t he o ffer.” Id

. (ci t at i o n an d pu n ct u at i o n

6o m it t ed ). Al l of t h at sai d

, “ [ t ] h e l aw fav o rs co m p ro m i s e, an d wh en p art i es h av e

en t ered i nt o a d efi n i t e, cert ai n

, an d u n am b i g u o us ag reem e n t t o s e t tl e, i t s h o u l d b e

e n f o rced .” Cu mb er l a nd Co n t r a ct o r s

, 3 2 7 Ga. Ap p

. at 1 2 7 (3 ) (ci tat i o n a n d

p u n ct u at i o n o m it t ed ).

T he r e qu i red offer an d u n co n d i t i o n al accep tan ce are p res e nt he r e

. B utle r a dm it s

t h at Pro g res s i v e o f

f e red t o s et t l e Bu t l er’ s cl ai m s fo r $ 1 7 ,5 00

, an d J et t ’ s l et t er

u n co nd i t io n al l y accep t ed Pro g res s iv e’ s o ffer t o s et t l e th o s e cl ai m s fo r t h at s am e

am ou n t

. Th i s i s en o u gh t o creat e a b i n d i n g set t l em en t ag reem en t. See, e.g

., Vi l d i b i l l

,

2 4 4 Ga. Ap p

. at 7 4 9 (1 ) (l et t er accep t in g o ffer t o s et t l e fo r s peci fi c do l l ar am o u n t in

ret u rn fo r “ ‘ an y r e l eas e y o u d eem ap p ro pri at e’ ” creat ed a b i n d i n g set t l em en t

ag reem en t ); Her r i n g v. Du n n i n g

, 2 1 3 Ga. Ap p

. 6 9 5

, 6 9 8 -9 9 (4 46 SE2 d 19 9 ) (1 9 9 4 )

( a t t o rn ey ’ s l et t er wri t t en to accep t p l ai n t iff’ s o ffer to s et tl e cl ai m s fo r $ 1 5 ,0 0 0 i n

ex ch an g e fo r fu l l an d fi n a l r e l eas e creat ed b in d i n g s et tl em en t ag reem en t ). See al s o

Tu r ner v. W

i ll ia ms o n

, 3 2 1 Ga. Ap p

. 2 09

, 2 13 (2 ) (7 3 8 SE2 d 7 1 2) ( 2 0 1 3 ) (b i n d i n g

s et t l em en t ag reem en t f

o r m e d wh ere i n s uran ce-cl ai m s h an d l er’ s w ri t t en an d o ral

co m m u n icat io ns s h o w ed u n eq u i v o cal accep t an ce o f an o ffer t o s et t l e fo r i n s u ran ce

p o l i cy li m i t s i n ex ch an g e fo r ex ecu t i o n o f s t at u t o ry rel eas e fo rm ). J et t ’ s l e t t er al s o

7i n cl u d es i n fo rm at io n ab o u t th e l o g i s t i cs o f p ay m en t an d th e han d l i n g o f l i en s b y J et t ’ s

fi rm

, b u t t h i s l an g u ag e was p u rel y i n fo rm at i o n al an d d i d n o t i m p o s e an y ad d i t i o n al

co n di t i o n s t hat wo u l d h av e creat ed a co u n t ero ffer rat h er t h an an accep t an ce. S e e

McReyn o l d

s v. Kr eb s

, 2 9 0 Ga. 8 5 0

, 8 5 3 (2 ) (7 2 5 S E 2 d 5 8 4 ) (2 0 1 2) (“ A pu rp o rt ed

accep t an ce o f a p l ai nt iff’ s s et t l em en t offer wh i c h i m p o s e s co n di t i o n s

. . . wi l l b e

co n st ru ed as a co u n t er-o ffer.” (ci t at i o n an d p u n ct u at i o n o m i t ted )); Her r i n g

, 2 1 3 Ga.

Ap p

. at 69 8 -9 9 (l an g u a g e as k i n g ab o u t t h e ex i s t en ce o f l i en s d i d n o t creat e a

co u nt er o f fer b ecau s e it m erel y s o u g h t co nfi rm at i o n o f co un s el ’ s bel i ef ab o u t t h e

ab s en ce o f l i en s rat h er t h an i m p o s e a n ew co nd i t i o n ). 2 Fi n al l y, J et t ’ s l et t er s at i s fi es

t h e wri t in g req u i rem en t f o r s e t t l em en t ag reem en ts w h o s e ex i s t en ce o r t erm s are in

d i s p u t e

. See B r u mb el o w

, 25 1 Ga. at 6 7 6 (ci t i n g OCGA § 1 5 -1 9-5 ) (ex pl ai n i n g t h at

“ [o ] rd i n ari l y

, fo r an at t o rn ey t o b i n d h is cl i en t t o a s et t l em en t ag reem en t wh ere t h ere

i s a d i s p u t e as t o t erm s

, t h e ag reem en t m u s t b e i n wri t i n g,” an d “ l et t ers o r d o cu m en t s

p rep ared b y at t o rn ey s w h ich m em ori al i ze t h e t erm s o f t h e a g r e em en t ” sat i s fy t h at

2 Cf. Tu r n er

, 32 1 Ga. Ap p

. a t 2 1 3 (1 ) (at t o rn ey ’ s l et t er p ro p os i n g u s e o f a

d i fferen t rel eas e fo rm was a co un t ero ffer rat h er th an an accep t an ce wh ere o ffer was

co n di t i o n ed o n ex ecu t i o n o f par t i c u l a r r el eas e); To r res v. El ki n

, 3 1 7 Ga. Ap p

. 1 3 5,

1 4 2 -4 3 (2 ) (7 3 0 SE2 d 5 18 ) (2 0 1 2 ) (p urp o rt ed accep t an ce l e t t e r e x p res s i n g t h e

as s u m pt i o n t hat t h e o ffero r wo u l d b e s at is fy i n g al l l i en s wa s a co u nt ero ffer rat h er

t h an an accep t an ce wh ere o ffer was s i l en t ab o u t l i en s ).

8req u i rem en t ); see, e.g

., Vi l d i b i ll v. Pa l mer Jo h n s o n o f S ava n n a h, In c.

, 2 4 4 Ga. Ap p.

7 4 7

, 7 49 (1 ) (5 3 6 Ga. Ap p

. 7 79 ) (2 0 0 0 ) (at to rn ey ’ s l et t er accep t i n g s et t l em en t o ffer

es t ab l i s h ed an en fo rceab l e ag reem en t ); Ba l la r d v. W i ll i ams

, 2 2 3 G a. Ap p

. 1

, 2 (4 7 6

SE2 d 7 8 3 ) (1 9 9 6 ) (at t o rn ey ’ s l et t er referri n g t o an o r a l s et t lem en t reach ed m o n t h s

earl ier “ w as en o u gh t o s at i s fy t h e wri t i n g req u i rem en t ”).

In co n cl u d i n g t h at th e ag reem en t was n o t en fo rceab l e, t he t ri al co u rt ci t ed t h e

ab s en ce o f a w ri t t en o ffer, t h e ab s en ce o f a s i g n ed rel e a s e

, a n d t h e fact t h at

Pro g res s i v e n ev er fo rm al l y “ ag reed t o ” t h e t erm s i n Jet t ’ s l et t er o r pai d t h e set t l em en t

am ou n t

. N o n e o f t h es e p o i n t s cal l t h e ag reem en t ’ s en fo rceab il i t y i n t o q u es t i o n.

Geo rg i a l a w d o es n o t req ui re th at a s et t l em en t offer be m ad e i n wri t in g

. See, e.g

.,

Po u rr ez a v. Teel Ap

p r a i s a l s & A d vi s o r y, In c.

, 27 3 Ga. Ap p

. 8 8 0

, 8 8 3 (6 1 6 SE2 d 1 0 8 )

(2 0 0 5) (s et t lem en t ag r e e m en t was en fo rceab le w h ere o ffer was ex t en ded o ral l y );

Ba l l a r d

, 2 2 3 Ga. A p p

. at 2 (s et t l em en t ag reem en t was en fo rceab l e wi th ou t reg ard to

wh et h er o ffer w as o ral o r w ri t t en ). No r was ex ecu t i o n o f a rel eas e req u i red t o creat e

a b i n d in g s et t l em en t ag reem en t : t h e p art i es h ere cl earl y c o n t em p l at ed s i g n i n g

d o cu m en t s t o carry o u t t h e set t lem en t’ s t erm s

, bu t th at was n o t n eces sary t o creat e a

b i n d i n g ag reem en t in t h e fi rs t p l ace. See P ou r rez a

, 2 73 Ga. Ap p

. at 88 3 (t h e fact t h at

s et t l em en t ag reem en t was n o t si g n ed at th e t i m e t he p a r t i es ag reed t o s et tl e d i d n ot

9i n v al i d at e accep t an ce o f t h e o ffer); Her r i n g

, 2 1 3 Ga. Ap p

. at 69 9 (p res en t at i o n o f an

accep t ab l e rel eas e “ m ay hav e b een a co n d i t i o n o f d efen d an t ’ s p erfo rm an ce b u t i t was

n o t an act n eces s ary to a c c e p t a n c e o f p l ai n t iff’ s o ffer t o s et t l e”). Si m i l arl y

,

Pro g res s i v e’ s fai l u re t o t en d er p ay m en t o f t h e s et tl em en t am o u n t b ears o n

Pro g res s i v e’ s p erfo rm an ce o f t h e s et t lem en t ag reem en t

, no t i t s ex i s t en ce o r v al i d i t y

.

See P o u r r ez a

, 2 7 3 Ga. Ap p

. at 8 8 3 ; Her r i ng

, 2 1 3 G a. Ap p

. at 6 9 9

. An d Pro g res s i v e

was n o t req u ired t o “ ag ree t o ” t h e t erm s i n J et t ’ s l et t er; t h e ag reem en t was fo rm ed

o n ce Pro g res s i v e’ s o ffer was accep t ed

, wi t h o u t t h e n eed fo r an y fu rt h er act i o n by

P r o g r e s s i v e

. See Newt o n v. R a g l a n d

, 3 2 5 Ga. Ap p. 37 1

, 3 7 4 (1 ) (7 5 0 SE2 d 7 6 8 )

(2 0 1 3) (o n ce o ffer was accep t ed

, b in d in g co n t r a c t w a s fo rm ed

, wi t h o u t reg ard to

fu rt her co m

m u n i cat i on s b et ween t h e p art ies ).

Fo r t h es e reas o n s

, w e co n cl u d e t h at t h e p art i es e n t e r e d i n t o an en fo rceab l e

s et t l em en t ag reem en t, s o t h e t ri al co u r t t h e r e fo re erred b y d en y i n g Pro g res s i v e’ s

m o ti o n t o en fo rce t he ag reem en t

.

Ju d g men t r ever sed . McFa d

d en , P. J., a n d

Go b ei l , J., co ncu r

.

10