Court Opinion

ID: 9879660
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-27 18:33:00.141208+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:47:59.188367
License: Public Domain

Hoffman, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part
  

   {¶ 46} I concur in the majority's analysis and decision regarding this Court's jurisdiction to review Appellant's assignments of error. However, I respectfully dissent from the majority's decision to sustain Appellant's first assignment of error and to reverse the trial court's decision.
  

   {¶ 47} Given the unrefuted testimony of Attorney Farnan concerning the accepted, common practice of releasing the entity paying money on behalf of its insurer, in addition to the party being released, I would find the failure of the agreement to specifically discuss the release of Crum & Forster is a "less essential term" of the settlement agreement. The trial court properly determined the parties intended to be bound by the agreement and the trial court was free to fashion the release terms to restrict the scope of the release of Crum & Forster in accordance with the acknowledgment set forth by Attorney Farnan at the hearing.
   
    1
   

    I would also overrule Appellant's second assignment of error.