context: The cashing of the checks resulted, therefore, in satisfaction of the accord. Because there was an accord and satisfaction, appellant is precluded from suing either on the original claim or on the accord.
citation_a.signal: cf.
citation_a.parenthetical: upon cashing defendant's check, plaintiff who failed to perform condition of settlement agreement estopped from asserting original claim
citation_a.sentence: Cf. McGehee v. Mata, 330 So.2d 248 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976) (upon cashing defendant’s check, plaintiff who failed to perform condition of settlement agreement estopped from asserting original claim).
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.parenthetical: check cashed in full and final payment for all goods, services and claims was accord and satisfaction
citation_b.sentence: See, e. g., Yelen v. Cindy’s Inc., 386 So.2d 1234 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980), pet. for rev. dismissed, 394 So.2d 1154 (Fla.1980) (circumstances and conditions under which appellant received and cashed check established compromise in settlement); Hannah v. James A. Ryder, Corp., supra at 510 (noting common law rule with respect to cashing check purporting to full payment); Pino v. Lopez, 361 So.2d 192 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978), cert. dismissed, 365 So.2d 714 (Fla.1978) (check cashed in full and final payment for all goods, services and claims was accord and satisfaction).