Wilson et al v. Morrilton Arkansas, City of et al
ORDER DISMISSING CASE with prejudice by reason of settlement. Signed by Judge Billy Roy Wilson on 12/22/11. (kpr)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
BRANDON WILSON, et al
CITY OF MORRILTON, ARKANSAS, et al
ORDER DISMISSING ACTION
BY REASON OF SETTLEMENT
Counsel has advised the Court that this matter has settled and request the case be dismissed.
The Supreme Court has held that district courts do not have inherent power, that is, automatic
ancillary jurisdiction, to enforce settlement agreements. Ancillary jurisdiction to enforce a
settlement agreement exists "only if the parties' obligation to comply with the terms of the settlement
agreement is made part of the order of dismissal--either by a provision 'retaining jurisdiction' over
the settlement agreement or by incorporation of the terms of the settlement agreement in the order."1
It is the obligation of the parties requesting dismissal to comply with the terms of the settlement
and this Court specifically retains jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the settlement agreement
forming the underpinning of this dismissal.
IT IS ORDERED that the complaint, be, and it hereby is, dismissed with prejudice, subject
to the terms of the Settlement Agreement, and/or Consent Decree. If any party desires that the
written settlement agreement be part of the record herein, it should be filed with the Court within
twenty (20) days.
Kokkonon v Guardian Life Insurance Co. of America, 511
U.S. 375, 114 S.Ct. 1673, 1676-77 (1994); Meiner v Missouri Dept.
of Mental Health, 62 F.3d 1126, 1127(8th Cir. 1995)
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk forthwith serve copies of this Order upon the
attorneys for the parties appearing in this action.
Dated this 22nd day of December, 2011.
/s/Billy Roy Wilson
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?