Legal Opinion
Matsuura v. Alston & Bird
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided February 2, 1999No. Nos. 97-16400, 97-17033PublishedCited by 26 opinions
1Per curiam
After settling their product liability suits against E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company, Inc. (DuPont), David and Stephen Mat-suura allegedly discovered that DuPont had fraudulently induced them to settle for less than the fair value of their claims. They sued DuPont1 for fraud, but the district court held the suit was barred by general releases in the settlement agreements. We conclude that under Delaware law, which governs, defrauded tort plaintiffs may stand by their settlement agreements and institute an independent action for fraud, which the Matsuura-DuPont releases do not bar. We…
2Cases cited36 opinions
- California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement v. Dillingham Construction, N. A.Supreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Kawamata Farms, Inc. v. United Agri ProductsHawaii Supreme Court · 1997
- Adams v. JankouskasSupreme Court of Delaware · 1982
- Bilotti v. Accurate Forming Corp.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1963
- Norton v. PoplosSupreme Court of Delaware · 1982
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Mazzoni Farms, Inc. v. EI DuPont De Nemours and Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 2000
- Ismail v. County of OrangeDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2012
- Florida Evergreen Foliage v. E.I. DuPont De Nemours & Co.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2006
- Matsuura v. EI Du Pont De Nemours and Co.Hawaii Supreme Court · 2003
- Exotics Hawaii-Kona, Inc. v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co.Hawaii Supreme Court · 2007
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.