1. Suppose that in the middle of settlement negotiations, Hannington becomes frustrated with the impasse. He hires his neighbor, another attorney not yet involved in the case, to draft a settlement agreement and sends it to Penn. Is apparent authority created in this circumstance? Explain.
2. Since Hannington never actually signed the agreement, was it reasonable for Penn to assume that Hannington’s attorney had obtained his express consent to the terms? Has the court effectively deprived Hannington of his right to proceed to trial?

Hannington brought a breach of contract suit against Penn. Just prior to trial, Hannington’s attorney notified the court that a settlement had been reached and sent Penn a final draft of a proposed settlement agreement. Penn agreed to the terms and sent the agreement back to Hannington’s attorney with Penn’s authorized signatures. Hannington refused to sign the agreement, hired a new attorney, and opted to proceed to trial. The trial court refused to allow Hannington’s case to go to trial because Hannington’s attorney had apparent authority to settle the case.