Matches in SCALES for { <http://schemas.scales-okn.org/rdf/scales#/DocketEntry/ilnd;;1:07-cv-06412_de106> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 5 of
5
with 100 items per page.
- ilnd;;1:07-cv-06412_de106 RegisterActionDate "2017-04-21" @default.
- ilnd;;1:07-cv-06412_de106 RegisterActionDescriptionText "MINUTE entry before the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall. Plaintiff 1F3CAFA moves this Court to enforce the terms of a February 2010 settlement agreement that he reached with Defendant Illinois Department of Corrections (IDOC). 166 Enforcing a settlement agreement requires its own basis for jurisdiction in Federal Court, even if the District Court had jurisdiction over the prior matter. Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of America, 511 U.S. 375, 378 (1994), distinguished on other grounds by Oparaeche v. Reddy, 557 Fed.Appx. 548, 548-49 (7th Cir. Jan. 24, 2014); see e.g., Knowles Electronics, LLC v. American Auto Component, Inc., No. 06-CV-6213, 2017 WL 914461, at *1 n.2 (N.D.Ill., Mar. 8, 2017). If a court dismisses a claim after the parties have informed the court that they have resolved the matter pursuant to a settlement agreement, the judge's "mere awareness" of the agreement does not make it part of any Court order; the Court would need to separately order continued jurisdiction, for example by including a provision in its order that retains jurisdiction over the settlement agreement, or by incorporating the settlement terms into the order. Kokkonen, 511 U.S. at 381. A breach of settlement agreement involves a breach of contract claim, and "[n]o federal statute makes that connection (if it constitutionally could) the basis for federal-court jurisdiction over the contract dispute." Id. Absent such an order or an independent basis for federal jurisdiction, like diversity jurisdiction, "enforcement of the settlement agreement is for state courts." Id. at 381-82. This Court did not issue an order with a provision to retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement, Dkt. 120, and the claim provides no other independent basis for jurisdiction, so the Court denies this Motion for lack of jurisdiction. See id. at 378, 381-82. 166 Plaintiff's Motion to enforce 166 is denied. Mailed notice (lk, ) (Entered: 04/21/2017)" @default.
- ilnd;;1:07-cv-06412_de106 AdministrativeID "167" @default.
- ilnd;;1:07-cv-06412_de106 OntologyLabel minute_entry @default.
- ilnd;;1:07-cv-06412_de106 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilnd;;1:07-cv-06412_de105 @default.