Court Opinion

ID: 9471028
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 03:23:50.123689+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:42:14.756179
License: Public Domain

CHAPMAN, Circuit Judge,
dissenting:
I respectfully dissent for two reasons. First, the majority has decided this case on a legal basis — that federal and not state law controls — that was neither briefed nor argued by the parties.
Second, this does not appear to me to be a proper case to reverse and remand to the district court for further factual inquiry on the substantiality of the mistake and the consequent effect on the bargain struck by the parties. Gamewell has had more than adequate opportunity to present evidence and law on the issue of mistake. Defendant moved for judgment on the settlement agreement on February 18, 1982. On February 22, the district court issued an Order to Show Cause directing the plaintiff to show cause by March 8, 1982 why defendant’s motion should not be granted. Prior to the hearing held on April 15, 1982, both parties submitted briefs in support of their positions. In the course of the hearing, the district court invited the parties to submit additional evidence and legal authorities. Only defendant did so. Because Gamewell had approximately two months to present material to the district court, I see no reason to remand the case now for further factual development. Plaintiff should not be afforded yet another opportunity to be relieved of the consequences of its prior failures to act.