Steelman v. Marose et al

Filing 51

MEMORANDUM - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendants motion to dismiss plaintiffs case with prejudice and void the settlement agreement [Doc. # 50 ] is GRANTED. A separate order of dismissal will be filed with this Memorandum. Signed by District Judge Carol E. Jackson on 6/11/13. (KJS)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
CONNIE STEELMAN,
Plaintiff,
vs.
MAROSE PROPERTIES II, LLC,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 4:12-CV-5 (CEJ)

MEMORANDUM
This matter is before the Court on defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s case
with prejudice. Plaintiff has not responded, and the time allowed for doing so has
expired.
On April 4, 2013, the parties participated in mediation and reached a settlement.
As part of the settlement agreement, plaintiff agreed to release the defendant from all
claims arising under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Also, the agreement provided
that the lien for fees and expert expenses asserted by plaintiff’s attorney (whom she
had discharged earlier in the litigation) would be satisfied by a payment of $2,500.00.
After the mediation, plaintiff’s attorney and expert signed the settlement agreement
and defense counsel forwarded a copy of the executed agreement to plaintiff for her
signature. In response, plaintiff told defense counsel that she would not sign the
settlement agreement because her former attorney and expert did not contact her by
phone. [Doc. #50-10]. Defendant now requests that plaintiff’s cause of action be
dismissed with prejudice pursuant to the Court’s order of April 16, 2013. In that order,
the Court granted the parties until May 7, 2013 to file a stipulation of dismissal, and
cautioned the parties that, if the stipulation was not timely filed, the Court would enter

an order dismissing the action with prejudice.
The evidence submitted by defendant establishes that an agreement was
reached at mediation. The evidence also establishes that plaintiff’s unwillingness to
sign the settlement agreement is without good cause.

The Court concludes that

plaintiff’s behavior warrants the dismissal of this action with prejudice and nullification
of the settlement agreement.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s case
with prejudice and void the settlement agreement [Doc. # 50] is GRANTED.
A separate order of dismissal will be filed with this Memorandum.

____________________________
CAROL E. JACKSON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated this 11th day of June, 2013.

-2-