Opinion ID: 1550523
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Alleged Privileged Status of Settlement Agreement

Text: Finally, the University argues that the settlement agreement falls within a privilege against discovery or use as evidence and that it is therefore protected from disclosure under section 402(3)(B) of the Freedom of Access Act. 1 M.R.S.A. § 402(3)(B) (1979). That section excepts from disclosure [r]ecords that would be within the scope of a privilege against discovery or use as evidence recognized by the courts of this State in civil or criminal trials if the records or inspection thereof were sought in the course of a court proceeding.... The University contends that Rule 408(a) of the Maine Rules of Evidence, which generally provides that evidence relating to settlements is not admissible to prove liability, constitutes such a privilege against discovery or use as evidence. [3] We reject the University's argument. As we stated in Moffett v. City of Portland , in determining whether a particular record is protected under section 402(3)(B), the court considers whether by reason of a privilege [the record] would be inadmissible as evidence in a court proceeding in the State of Maine. In addition to the privilege against self-incrimination declared by the Fifth Amendment to the United State. Constitution, various privileges codified in Article V of the Maine Rules of Evidence and others provided by statute are recognized by the courts of this State. 400 A.2d at 346. Rule 408 represents a policy choice to exclude evidence relating to settlements as irrelevant on the issue of liability. It does not make such evidence privileged. Rule 408 comes under Article IV of the Rules of Evidence, entitled Relevancy and Its Limits. It is Article V of the Rules, entitled Privileges, that sets forth those privileges against discovery that are contained in the Rules of Evidence. Furthermore, Rule 408 in terms bars the admissibility of settlement agreements only on substantive issues in dispute between the parties to the agreement. That is not what we are here involved with. This case is not a dispute between the University and Gavett, but rather a dispute between the two of them and Gannett. The inadmissibility in evidence of settlement agreements has as its policy objective the encouragement of out-of-court disposition of disputes by the parties themselves. See Field & Murray, Maine Evidence § 408.1, at 127-28 (2d ed. 1987). That objective is in no way compromised by our holding that the public has a right to know the terms upon which a public employer has settled with a resigning contract employee. The entry is: Judgment of the Superior Court modified to protect from disclosure the second sentence of paragraph 3 of the settlement agreement. As so modified, the judgment is affirmed. All concurring. SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made by, between and among the University of Maine System, acting through the University of Maine, with principal offices in Bangor, Maine (hereinafter University), the Associated Faculties of the University of Maine System, Maine Teachers Association/National Education Association, an employee organization with a place of business in Bangor, Maine (hereinafter Association) and Peter M. Gavett, Head Coach of Women's Basketball and Lecturer in Physical Education and Athletics at the University of Maine, (hereinafter Peter M. Gavett). For valuable consideration, and in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants contained herein, the University, the Association and Peter M. Gavett hereby agree as follows: 1. Peter M. Gavett will resign his employment with the University by his submission of a written resignation immediately upon execution of this Agreement, which resignation shall be effective at 5:00 p.m. (D.S.T.) June 27, 1988. 2. Peter M. Gavett will vacate his office at the University of Maine and remove all his personal belongings from the University of Maine campus by July 5, 1988. 3. Peter M. Gavett will have no access to the Memorial Gymnasium/Fieldhouse facility on the University of Maine campus for a period of one year, from July 5, 1988. [sentence deleted] 4. University will pay to Peter M. Gavett the gross lump sum of Thirty-Six Thousand dollars ($36,000) being the equivalent of one year of future salary determined and calculated as of June 27, 1988. From said gross amount, University will make required deductions for Social Security, FICA taxes, Federal and State of Maine withholding taxes. 5. Peter M. Gavett shall not initiate social, verbal or written contact with any woman who is currently a member of the University of Maine women's basketball team or any woman who has been a member of the team during the last two years except with the prior approval of the Athletic Director. 6. In consideration for lump sum payment, under section 4 above, Peter M. Gavett releases and discharges University from any and all demands, claims, or actions of every nature which he, his heirs or assigns, may have against the University in existence or having accrued as of the 27th of June, 1988. The University, Association and Peter M. Gavett agree that neither they, nor any of their officers, employees or representatives will disclose or communicate to anyone any portion or condition of this Settlement Agreement or the underlying reasons required to divulge information pursuant to a duly authorized court subpeona, summons or judicial order. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement, this 25th day of June, 1988. Peter M. Gavett University of Maine System Associated Faculties of the University of Maine System MTA, NEA