Hepper v. Adams County, North Dakota
United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
133 F.3d 1094 (1998)
- Written by Jody Stuart, JD
Facts
Bryce Hepper (plaintiff) was a passenger in a car driven by Mera Merz. Merz lost control of the car, and Hepper was seriously injured. Hepper reached a settlement with Merz and American Family Mutual Insurance (American), Merz’s insurer. Leo Ehrmantraut, American’s claims adjuster, represented Merz and American in the settlement negotiations. The settlement included a general release, which provided that Hepper fully released Merz, and all other persons who were or might be liable, from all claims arising from the car accident. After the settlement, Hepper sued Adams County, North Dakota (the county) (defendant) in federal district court for negligence in the signage of the road where the accident occurred. The county moved for summary judgment, arguing that the general release signed by Hepper released all parties who might be liable. Hepper responded that the release was not intended to act in accordance with its specific language. Ehrmantraut provided testimony supporting Hepper’s assertion. The district court granted the county’s motion because the language of the release was unambiguous, parol evidence of intent was thus inadmissible, and therefore, the agreement’s clear language released all other persons who were or might be liable. Hepper appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Heaney, J.)
Dissent (Bright, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.