Ali Haghighi v. Russian-American Broadcasting Co.
United States District Court for the District of Minnesota
945 F. Supp. 1233 (1996)
- Written by Tammy Boggs, JD
Facts
Ali Haghighi operated International Radio Network (IRN) (plaintiffs), which distributed foreign-language radio programming. In 1993, IRN contracted with Russian-American Broadcasting Co. (RABC) (defendant) to rebroadcast IRN’s Russian-language radio programs. The parties’ relationship deteriorated, and in 1995, IRN sued RABC for breach of contract. RABC counterclaimed to recover payments owed by IRN. The parties agreed to attend mediation. Before the mediation, the parties signed a mediation agreement that incorporated the language of Minnesota statute § 572.35. The statutory section required the inclusion of specified written provisions in a mediated settlement agreement, such as advising the parties to consult an attorney and that the agreement was binding. At the mediation, RABC Chief of Staff Russell Moro attended on RABC’s behalf, and Haghighi attended on IRN’s behalf. Both men were represented by counsel. After hours of mediation in which the mediator shuttled between the two parties, RABC and IRN appeared to agree to a set of terms. Moro was flying out of town, and the mediator and RABC’s attorney suggested that the parties write down the terms. RABC’s counsel proceeded to draft the majority of a three-page handwritten document containing 14 terms. All counsel reviewed and initialed each of the terms and revisions. Moro and Haghighi signed each page of the agreement. The document did not contain the § 572.35 language. Thereafter, IRN filed a motion to enforce the handwritten document as a settlement agreement. The court set an evidentiary hearing to determine whether a settlement agreement had been reached. RABC argued against the document’s enforceability based on the document’s failure to include language that it was a “binding” agreement.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Alsop, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 814,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.