Andrews v. United States of America

Filing 37

ORDER granting 36 Motion for Settlement. The settlement agreement is approved and this case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The Court retains jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the settlement agreement. Signed by Honorable P. K. Holmes III on July 16, 2021. (mjm)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FORT SMITH DIVISION JEFF ANDREWS v. PLAINTIFF 2:20-CV-02094 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DEFENDANT ORDER Plaintiff filed a motion (Doc. 36) for approval of settlement of this case. Plaintiff’s motion indicates that the parties have reached a tentative settlement agreement, subject to Court approval under Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-410(c). Plaintiff has agreed to accept $99,500 to resolve all claims against Defendant, and Defendant’s worker’s compensation carrier has waived any right to subrogation. The Court has reviewed the motion and its exhibits. Because Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2) allows the Court to dismiss a case at Plaintiff’s request on terms the Court considers proper, and in the interest of expediting procedural steps necessary to resolve this matter, the Court will approve the settlement as a term of dismissal with prejudice. Furthermore, the Court will retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement. Should a release not be executed by Plaintiff or settlement funds not be distributed to Plaintiff, either party may move in this case for specific performance of their agreement. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion (Doc. 36) is GRANTED. The settlement agreement is approved and this case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The Court retains jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the settlement agreement. IT IS SO ORDERED this 16th day of July, 2021. /s/P. K. Holmes, ΙΙΙ P.K. HOLMES, III U.S. 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?