Yates et al v. Saint Clair

Filing 21

ORDER by Judge Hamilton denying 20 Stipulation (pjhlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/2/2013)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7
CRAIG YATES, et al.,
8
Plaintiffs,

No. C 09-1378 PJH

9
v.

ORDER DENYING STIPULATION

10
11

MARIE SAINT CLAIR,

12

Defendant.
___________________________________/

13
14

Plaintiffs in the above-captioned case have filed a “stipulation for the entry of

15

judgment,” seeking to have the court enter judgment based on a stipulation that was signed

16

by the parties on April 19, 2011. Plaintiffs have also submitted a letter explaining their

17

delay in seeking a judgment. According to plaintiffs, a settlement was reached on April 19,

18

2011, the terms of which provided for defendant to make her first payment on September 1,

19

2011. After not receiving any payment, plaintiffs contacted defendant on October 12, 2011.

20

Defendant responded on October 27, 2011, requesting more time to make the payment.

21

As of January 9, 2012, plaintiffs still had not received any payment, so they again contacted

22

defendant, who again requested more time. According to plaintiffs, no payments have ever

23

been made. Thus, plaintiffs now submit a stipulated judgment for the court’s approval.

24

However, even though this stipulated judgment was signed by the parties on April

25

19, 2011, it had never been submitted to the court prior to June 11, 2013. In fact, the only

26

previous indication that the parties had settled was provided via a two-page “notice of

27

settlement,” filed on June 29, 2011, stating simply that “the parties in the above-captioned

28

matter have agreed to settlement terms” and that “[d]ismissal documents will be filed with
the court no later than sixty (60) days from the filing of this notice.” See Dkt. 16. No such

1

dismissal documents were ever filed, so the court instead entered its own conditional

2

dismissal order on November 7, 2011. See Dkt. 17. The court ordered the case dismissed

3

without prejudice, and gave the parties 90 days to vacate the dismissal by certifying that

4

the agreed consideration had not been delivered over. Id. Importantly, even though

5

plaintiffs were aware of defendant’s failure to make payments before the expiration of those

6

90 days (which occurred on February 5, 2012), plaintiffs did not certify to the court that the

7

payments had not been made. As a result, after February 5, 2012, the dismissal of this

8

case was with prejudice.

9

By filing this April 2011 stipulation now, plaintiffs are essentially seeking to enforce

10

the settlement agreement that was entered into between the parties. However, “federal

11

courts do not have inherent or ancillary jurisdiction to enforce a settlement agreement

12

simply because the subject of that settlement was a federal lawsuit.” O’Connor v. Colvin,

13

70 F.3d 530, 532 (9th Cir. 1995) (citing Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance, 511 U.S. 375

14

(1994)). “When the initial action is dismissed, federal jurisdiction terminates,” and a “motion

15

to enforce the settlement agreement” is “a separate contract dispute requiring its own

16

independent basis for jurisdiction.” Id. The only exception would be if the settlement terms

17

are incorporated into the dismissal order, in which case “a violation of those terms would

18

amount to a violation of the court’s order,” giving the court “ancillary jurisdiction to ‘vindicate

19

its authority.’” O’Connor at 532. In this case, the terms of the parties’ settlement was not

20

incorporated into the dismissal order. In fact, the court was not aware of the settlement

21

terms until plaintiffs filed their stipulation on June 11, 2013. Thus, any attempt to enforce

22

the settlement agreement is a separate contract dispute, over which this court does not

23

appear to have jurisdiction. Accordingly, the “stipulation for the entry of judgment” is

24

DENIED.

25
26
27
28

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: July 2, 2013
______________________________
PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON
United States District Judge