Summary
In Hale v. Shear Express, Inc., 932 So.2d 514 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006), we reversed an order of the judge of compensation claims enforcing a settlement agreement.
Summary of this case from Hale v. Shear Express, Inc.Opinion
No. 1D05-3636.
June 20, 2006.
Appeal from the Judge of Compensation Claims, Doris E. Jenkins.
David Bromley of The Bleakley Law Firm, Tampa, Susan W. Fox of Fox Loquasto, Tampa, and Wendy S. Loquasto of Fox Loquasto, Tallahassee, for Appellant.
David K. Beach, and Elizabeth P. Mulligan of Rissman, Barrett, Hurt, Donahue McLain, P.A., Tampa, for Appellee.
In this workers' compensation case, claimant seeks review of a final order enforcing a settlement agreement. She contends that it is clear from the record that the parties never reached agreement on all essential terms. We agree. See, e.g., Suggs v. Defranco's, Inc., 626 So.2d 1100, 1100-01 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993) (to be enforceable, a settlement agreement must reflect assent by the parties to all essential terms; if any remain open, subject to future negotiation, there can be no enforceable contract). Accordingly, we reverse the order enforcing the settlement agreement, and remand with directions that the judge of compensation claims hold the final merits hearing previously requested by claimant.
REVERSED and REMANDED, with directions.
KAHN, C.J., WEBSTER, and HAWKES, JJ., concur.