Thomas v. Union Pacific Railroad Company
ORDER DISMISSING CASE with prejudice pursuant to a settlement reached by the parties. Signed by Judge William R. Wilson, Jr on 2/26/10. (bkp)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS PINE BLUFF DIVISION PHILLIP A. THOMAS vs. 5:08CV00287-WRW DEFENDANT PLAINTIFF
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY 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 26th day of February, 2010.
/s/ Wm. R. Wilson, Jr. 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?