Martin Blaya, of our Miami office, with the assistance of KD’s Appellate and Coverage Practice Group, convinced a court to enforce a settlement previously entered into by the plaintiff. The plaintiff argued that the settlement was invalid for two reasons: (1) she had not yet been named the personal representative of her father’s estate when the settlement was entered into in her name on behalf of her father’s estate; and (2) she did not authorize her prior attorney to enter into the settlement agreement and, therefore, the prior attorney had no authority to settle the claim. Importantly, regarding this second argument, the plaintiff invoked attorney-client privilege during her deposition, with the court sustaining those objections, making it impossible to discover what exactly the plaintiff may or may not have authorized her prior attorney to do with respect to settling the claim. Fortunately, the plaintiff’s prior attorney was not so tight-lipped, and he testified that he had the plaintiff’s express authority to settle the claim. At the hearing on the motion to enforce settlement, Martin argued that, under Florida law, the powers of a personal representative relate back in time to validate acts made by the person prior to being officially appointed. And sealing the fate of the plaintiff, Martin lastly argued that because the plaintiff invoked her attorney-client privilege—preventing the discovery of information that went to the heart of this dispute—the court was left to rely solely on the testimony of the plaintiff’s prior attorney, which supported the defendant’s position. The court agreed and granted the defendant’s motion to enforce settlement.