How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Ely Your Own Question
Ely, Counselor at Law
Category: Legal
Satisfied Customers: 102134
Experience:  Private practice with focus on family, criminal, PI, consumer protection, and business consultation.
Type Your Legal Question Here...
Ely is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

A legal contract was drafted and required the signature of

This answer was rated:

A legal contract was drafted and required the signature of 4 parties (8 people) and had signature blocks for all 8 people. Husband and Wife A., Husband and Wife B., Husband and Wife C., and finally Husband and Wife D. Husband and Wife A were providing a hold harmless for Husband and Wife B, C, and D. The contract was drafted and A, B, and C signed the agreement. Husband and Wife D ended up refused to sign the agreement. Since Husband and Wife D did not sign the agreement, the contract was not fully executed and is not legally enforceable, correct?
Hello friend. My name is XXXXX XXXXX welcome to JustAnswer. Please note: (1) this is general information only, not legal advice, and, (2) there may be a slight delay between your follow ups and my replies.

Can you please tell me more about what the contract was for and what D's role was in the contract?

This is not an answer, but an Information Request. I need this information to answer your question. Please reply, so I can answer your question. Thank you in advance.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.



The four parties are splitting up thier business relationships. The four parties have argued for months about who is at fault for certain businesses failing, who is the reason the other business is a success, etc. etc. Each party has threatened to sue the other on multiple occasions. They ended up deciding that the best idea was to simple go seperate ways and not sue each other. The main person threatening all of the law suits was Husband and Wife A. So the Husbad and Wife B,C, and D said we will agree to go our seperate ways but you need to agree not to sue us and provide a hold harmless. The hold harmless was drafted with a mutual hold harmless agreement between all parties. It was only signed by 3 of the 4 couples.

Thank you, XXXXX XXXXX this explains well!

No, the contract is still binding on the parties that signed it. It would only be not binding if D held some kind of execution that held the contract together (such as in an investment, D provided the capital) - D does not.

Ergo, in this case, A, B, and C are bound by the contract and cannot sue each other. However, D is not bound and may still sue. However, under this matter, the agreement may also not protect D from being sued as well.

But in the end, A, B, and C are protected from each other and may not sue each other.

I hope this helps and clarifies. Good luck.

Please note: I aim to give you genuine information and not necessarily to tell you only what you wish to hear. Please, rate me on the quality of my information and do not punish me for my honesty. I understand that hearing things less than optimal is not easy, and I empathize.

Gentle Reminder: Please use the REPLY button to keep chatting, or RATE my answer when we are finished. Kindly rate my answer as one of the top three faces and then submit, as this is how I get credit for my time with you. Rating my answer the bottom two faces does not give me credit and reflects poorly on me, even if my answer is correct. I work very hard to formulate an informative and honest answer for you; please reciprocate my good faith. (You may always ask follow ups at no charge after rating.)
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Its worded a little different. Here is the contract language. Does this change anything? Thanks so much for your help.


Mutual Release of Liability


For $10 and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt is which is hereby acknowledged, and deemed and declared sufficient, XXXXX, their successors, heirs and assigns, hereby release XXXX and XXXXXX on the one hand, and XXXXXXXX, their successors, heirs and assigns, hereby release XXXXX on the other hand, from any and all claims, duties, contracts, liabilities, torts, damages, and responsibilities, known or unknown, both contractual and personal, arising from or related to, in any manner, fashion or circumstance, the following:











________________________ _________________



________________________ _________________



________________________ _________________



________________________ _________________








________________________ _________________



________________________ _________________




Thank you. Which party did not sign here?
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

XXXXXXXX did not Sign.


Now, follow this:

A contract is not binding unless there is CONSIDERATION. This means "something for something," essentially. This is why in many contracts, the symbolic language of "for consideration" is included - although it is not just symbolic - it serves a purpose as well.

"For $10 and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt is which is hereby acknowledged..."

Well, J & J did not sign, meaning that they did not acknowledge the consideration, meaning that there was no contract for them, at least.

So my answer stands as is - A, B, and C are enforced against each other, but D may still be sued possibly by any of them. Likewise, D may still sue A, B, or C, I am afraid.

Gentle Reminder: Again, surely you prefer that I be honest in my answer – please remember that rating negatively due to receiving bad news still hurts the expert – it is simply the way that the system is set up. Please use REPLY button to keep chatting, or RATE my answer when we are finished. (You may always ask follow ups free after rating.)
Ely and 9 other Legal Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Wow, this gets a little crazier. Turns out that XXXXXX did not sign the Agreement either. Only Ryan and Amanda + Bob and Patti Signed.

Hmm, in this case, then R&A and B&P are the only ones that cannot sue each other, arguably.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Ok, Thanks. Last question then I am done.


Is thier a timeframe on signing such a document. R&A and B&P signed 4/23/2013. Its now 5/13/2013. We do not want anybody else to sign. Thanks again

Please ask as much as you need to, friend - this is why I am here.

There is no time frame, I am afraid. So if they have a copy, they can sign it, and yes, the fact that they signed a different copy than you would not matter - it would still be enforceable if they did.

Gentle Reminder: Please use the REPLY button to keep chatting, or RATE and submit your rating when we are finished.