Opinion ID: 2111600
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Effect of the Lump-Sum Agreement

Text: Soper's last contention is that St. Regis, by entering into lump-sum settlement negotiations without mentioning the set-off against his pension, in effect waived or renegotiated the set-off. Because the set-off was never mentioned, either in the negotiations or in the petition for approval of the settlement by the Industrial Accident Commission, Soper argues that the settlement agreement precludes any subsequent set-off. St. Regis had not misinformed Soper or misled him into believing that the set-off would not be exercised. As the court below ruled, any mistake on his part was unilateral. Therefore, he cannot claim that he was induced to enter the settlement by a representation that should now be binding on St. Regis. Soper argues on appeal that he relied on the informational brochure distributed by St. Regis, but it is not possible to infer such reliance in the agreed statement of facts, which stated that Soper was only vaguely aware of other rights. In short, there is no basis for ruling that St. Regis lost or waived any rights in the negotiations that led to the settlement of the disputed claim. The entry is: Appeal denied. Judgment affirmed. GLASSMAN, J., did not sit. POMEROY, J., sat at oral argument and conference but retired prior to the preparation of the opinion. ARCHIBALD, J., sat at oral argument and conference but retired prior to the preparation of the opinion. He has joined the opinion as Active Retired Justice.