Petracca v. Petracca
Florida District Court of Appeal
706 So. 2d 904 (1998)
- Written by Elliot Stern, JD
Facts
Carole (plaintiff) and Luca Petracca (defendant) were a married couple who were engaged in extended litigation following Carole’s petition for dissolution of the marriage. Carole and Luca filed numerous motions, including many related to the discovery process. In one motion, Carole moved to have her expert inspect the value of land. After two years, Carole and Luca entered into a settlement agreement. Each party affirmed under oath that they had entered into the settlement voluntarily with advice of counsel and understood that it represented a final resolution of the case. Subsequently, Carole filed a motion to invalidate the settlement due to a lack of agreement between the parties regarding the meaning of settlement provisions. In the motion, Carole also petitioned the court to undo the settlement on grounds of unfairness, claiming that the settlement would leave her in an inequitable position. The trial judge denied the motion, and Carole appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Farmer, 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.
