Xxxxxxx Construction Co. 619 A.2d 304 (Pa.Super. 1993).
Xxxxxxx Construction Co. 619 A.2d 304 (Pa.Super. 1993). The Design Consultant and its officers, agents, representatives and employees must sign a legally enforceable waiver and release of any and all claims that the representative, employee, agent, or subcontractor may have to make a claims, or commence a lawsuit, or recover damages or losses from or against the School District (and the employees, agents and officials of the School District) or from or against any student (and the parents, guardians or custodians of the students) enrolled in any School District program or activity arising from or related to any injuries which are covered under Pennsylvania’s Workers’ Compensation statute or which would be covered if the representative, officer, agent, or subcontractor were an employee.
Xxxxxxx Construction Co. 2009 WL 807467 (PA. SUPER. MARCH 30, 2009) Plaintiff, Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxxx, alleged that he sustained personal injuries as a result of the negligence of employees of Defendant, X.X. Xxxxxxx Construction Co. Before trial, the parties entered into a high/low agreement with parameters of $1 million and $250,000. If the jury were to award more than $1 million Xxxxxxxx would receive $1 million. If the jury awarded less than $250,000, or returned a defense verdict, Xxxxxxxx would receive $250,000. 2009 WL 807467, *1. After an August 2007 trial a jury awarded Xxxxxxxx a little more than $1.07 million in damages. The court reduced the verdict to $1 million based on the high/low agreement. Xxxxxxxx then filed a petition for delay damages pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 238. The trial court denied the petition, and Xxxxxxxx appealed. Id. Rule 238 allows for “delay damages” or prejudgment interest to be added to the amount of compensatory damages awarded at trial. The purpose of the rule is to encourage pre-trial settlement by compensating “the plaintiff for inability to utilize funds rightfully due him.” Id. at *3 (quoting Xxxxxxxxxxxx v. Port Authority of Allegheny Cty., 426 A.2d 147, 154 (Pa. 1981)). Defendants are “given an opportunity to protect themselves from exposure to prejudgment interest by making a reasonable offer of settlement in good faith and in a timely fashion.” Id. (quoting Xxxxx x. Xxxxxxxx, 000 X.0x 000, 000 (Xx. Super. 1986)). THE COURT’S REASONING Pennsylvania courts have recognized high/low agreements as both contractual agreements and as a type of settlement, and therefore they should be interpreted under general rules of contractual interpretation. The fundamental rule in construing a contract “is to ascertain and give effect to the intention of the parties.” Xxxxx x. Xxxxx¸ 780 A.2d 664, 668 (Pa. Super. 2001). In so doing, courts “will adopt an interpretation which, under all circumstances, ascribes the most reasonable, probable, and natural conduct of the parties, bearing in mind the objects manifestly to be accomplished.” Id. Courts will “not ignore otherwise clear language merely because one of the parties did not anticipate related complications prior to performance.” Id. Although parties are free to craft high/low agreements in a manner that is mutually acceptable, the Court held that “to engraft the addition of delay damages onto the ceiling of a high/low agreement that is silent to their applicability renders a high/low agreement useless for liti...
