JAMES DILLARD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. STARCON INTERNATIONAL, INCORPORATED, Defendant-Appellee., 483 F.3d 502

Summary

The employee sued his former employer for racial discrimination. Settlement talks produced oral agreement on key terms, including a cash payment and reinstatement. New points of contention arose, however, when the employer provided the employee with a proposed written agreement. The employee objected to certain provisions in the written agreement that had not been previously discussed. The employer thought these new disputes did not undo the oral agreement the parties had already hammered out and moved to enforce the oral settlement. The employee denied that any final agreement had been reached because the parties had not ironed out several points first raised in the written agreement. The presiding magistrate judge granted the employer's motion, concluding that the parties had achieved a meeting of the minds on the material terms of the settlement. On review, the court noted that the employee did not make his acceptance contingent on approval of a written instrument. The court ...