We've mentioned before that verbal settlement agreements reached in the hallway are unenforceable. What about unsigned mediation settlement agreements?

In a concise opinion, the 3rd DCA (Shepherd, Rothenberg, and Lagoa) advised the parties in Mastec, Inc. v. Rolando Cue that an unsigned agreement is not enforceable. Here's everything you need to know:

1. PARTY/LAWYER SIGNATURE RULE: Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.730 ("Completion of Mediation") requires BOTH parties and their counsel to sign a mediation settlement agreement.

2. PARTY ONLY SIGNATURE, ENFORCED: The Fifth DCA has held that, if a party signs a mediation agreement, it is only a "technicality" that the party's lawyer did not sign -- and the settlement was enforced. See Jordan v. Adventist Health Systems/Sunbelt, Inc., 656 So. 2d 200 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995).

3. LAWYER-ONLY SIGNATURE, NOT ENFORCED: The Third DCA previously held that an agreement not signed by the party, but signed by the party's counsel in the party's presence, was NOT enforceable under Rule 1.730. See Gordon v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd., 641 So. 2d 515 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1994).

4. NO SIGNATURES AT ALL, NOT ENFORCED: In this present case, nobody signed. Court found that it was not enforceable.

Quick comments:

Note there is not much law and we might find other DCA's taking different approaches to interpreting Rule 1.730.

Lawyers have tried to argue theories of "agency" in order to enforce lawyer-only signed settlement agreement (outside of mediation). In the limited cases we've seen, that hasn't been well-received by the courts. Likely, agency arguments will face a stiffer challenge in cases such Mastec v. Cue since there is a specific Rule governing settlements at mediation.

Note that Rule 1.730 only applies to mediations and you might develop arguments as to whether your particular settlement occurred at "mediation."