Monster Energy Company v. Schechter

Here the parties to a tort action agreed to settle their lawsuit.  Their agreement was reduced to writing and included several provisions purporting to impose confidentiality obligations on the parties and their counsel.  All parties signed the agreement and their lawyers signed under a notation that they approved the written agreement as to form and content. 

Counsel allegedly violated the agreement by making public statements about the settlement and were sued, inter alia, for breach of contract.  Counsel urged they were not personally bound by the confidentiality provisions and moved to dismiss the suit under the anti-SLAPP statutes.  As to the cause of action at issue here, the trial court denied counsels’ motion.  The Court of Appeal reversed that ruling, concluding the notation meant only that counsel recommended their clients sign the document.  We conclude the notation does not preclude a factual finding that counsel both recommended their clients sign the document and intended to be bound by its provisions.

For more information, go to: 

http://www.beverlyhillsemploymentlaw.com/