The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

P filed suit for injuries she received when her vehicle collided with a D tractor-trailer. On June 8, 1999, P's attorney faxed to D's attorney and the mediator P's acceptance of '$40,000.00 in full settlement of all claims against D.' P's attorney also notified the district court, and the trial setting was vacated. After P received the document drafts, she notified her attorney that she would not accept the settlement and hired a new attorney. D filed a motion seeking enforcement of the settlement agreement. P contended in part that on July 19, 1999, after the settlement conference, she was diagnosed with a closed head injury, and she argued that mutual mistake precluded enforcement of the agreement. D contended that in Wyoming mutual mistake was inapplicable. The court ruled that a preponderance of the evidence showed that an oral settlement agreement without contingencies was reached. It held because Wyoming did not recognize a tort theory of mutual mistake, which the trial court understood to be different from mutual mistake in contract law, summary judgment was granted to D. P appealed.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.