Partridge Snow & Hahn Real Estate Attorney Brian G. Cafferty was recently featured in Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly discussing a Massachusetts Appeals Court decision enforcing a $100,000 settlement agreement arising out of a real estate dispute involving adjacent properties in Ashland.
The Appeals Court reversed a Superior Court ruling and held that the settlement agreement was binding and enforceable, even though certain transactional steps tied to a third-party sale had not been completed. The Court concluded that the parties had entered into a valid agreement and that the defendants could not rely on unmet conditions to avoid their payment obligation where their own actions interfered with the closing process.
In the article, Cafferty emphasized that the decision turned on foundational contract principles and the court’s treatment of the agreement as an enforceable contract rather than an informal framework. As he explained, the defendants’ obligation was not excused by the failure of conditions tied to the third-party transaction:
“The court treated [the settlement] as a basic contract. It was a conditional settlement, but the defendants didn’t act in good faith and it seems deliberately scuttled the sale to the third party. Because of that, the court wasn’t going to reward them for their basically deliberate actions.”
The Appeals Court’s decision reinforces that settlement agreements will generally be enforced where there is a clear meeting of the minds on essential terms, and that parties may not avoid obligations by preventing the occurrence of conditions precedent through their own conduct. The ruling also underscores the importance of good faith performance in structured real estate settlements involving contingent sales.
The full article is available through Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly (subscription required).
