Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Patterson v. Polidoro

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division

June 26, 2013

JAMES PATTERSON and DEBRA PATTERSON, Plaintiffs-Respondents,
v.
JOSEPH POLIDORO, Defendant-Appellant, and GREEN CITIES ENERGY and CPI SOLAR, LLC, Defendants.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

Argued June 11, 2013

On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Gloucester County, Docket No. L-1184-11.

Joseph Polidoro argued the cause pro se.

Ronald P. Sierzega argued the cause for respondents (Puff & Cockerill, attorneys; Mr. Sierzega, on the brief).

Before Judges Fisher and Grall.

PER CURIAM

Defendant Joseph Polidoro appeals an order enforcing an alleged settlement of this lawsuit, arguing he did not consent to its terms. Because the record was not sufficiently clear of doubt about whether defendant Polidoro had agreed to settle, we reverse the order under review and remand for further proceedings.

The following circumstances are not disputed. Plaintiffs James and Debra Patterson commenced this action against defendants Polidoro and Green Cities Energy, LLC, alleging breach of contract, a violation of the Consumer Fraud Act, N.J.S.A. 56:8-1 to -195, and other causes of action, arising from defendants' sale of a solar panel system and windmill for installation at plaintiffs' residence in Elmer. A law firm retained by defendants' insurance carrier appeared on defendants' behalf.

On May 22, 2012, the parties and their attorneys met to mediate a resolution of this matter. Plaintiffs concede no agreement was reached at that time, but a document entitled "Settlement Agreement and General Release" was prepared by the law firm representing defendants and later forwarded to plaintiffs' counsel to which plaintiffs agreed. Defendant Polidoro, however, refused to sign the agreement and asserted that he did not consent to the document's terms.

Thereafter, the law firm representing defendants moved to withdraw as counsel because "the insurance carrier" instructed

"that the fees and costs of this law firm will no longer be paid . . . in connection with the defense of the [d]efendants." Plaintiffs filed a cross-motion for enforcement of the settlement agreement they believed had been fully accepted by all parties. On the motions' return date, the trial judge viewed the dispute as "a close call, " but, without conducting an evidentiary hearing, decided to enforce the agreement.

Defendant Polidoro appeals, arguing, in a single point:

A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT THAT IS BEING NEGOTIATED REQUIRES THE AGREEMENT OF THE PARTIES INVOLVED, THIS AGREEMENT WAS NEVER AGREED UPON OR SIGNED BY THE DEFENDANT, ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.