Opinion ID: 1573671
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Eatons' Responsive Pleading

Text: The Eatons, by their new attorney, responded that they were not aware of the alleged settlement discussions between their former attorney and the defendants. Rather, they had appeared at their then attorney's office on September 27, 2004, for the express purpose of picking up their file and they were not there for the purpose of continued representation. Their response said that they inquired of the attorney as to the possibility of settlement, but only for the purpose of advising new counsel. The response further stated that their then attorney did not have any express or implied authority to settle the cause on behalf of the [Eatons]. Defendants argue that the Eatons' failure to provide a trial court record undermines any recourse they may have from the judgment. Defendants argue further that the Eatons cannot complain that no evidentiary hearing was held as no hearing was requested.