United States: You Settled Your Case And The Other Party Is Breaching The Settlement Agreement…Now What?

Last Updated: April 13 2013

Article by Ian D. Meklinsky and Student Author Rachel Karamessinis

In most instances, litigations end with the parties executing a settlement agreement and a stipulation to dismiss the case. Ideally, the execution of these documents brings the matter to full and final closure. However, a second round of disputes may inevitably arise as a result of settlement agreement breaches.

Settlement agreements are contracts in which the parties agree to be bound by certain obligations or refrain from certain actions in exchange for the settlement of the parties' claims. For example, in the employment context, a settlement agreement may require an employer to provide the employee with settlement monies and continuation of benefits, and may conversely require the employee to refrain from working with or soliciting the employer's clients and staff.

Not surprisingly, situations arise where a party fails to abide by its obligations as set forth in the settlement agreement. The non-breaching party is typically faced with two choices: 1) initiate a civil cause of action in connection with the breach (often a time-consuming and expensive process), or 2) seek intervention by the court that had jurisdiction over the original dispute. In order to avail oneself of the latter option, however, the parties must engage in pre-settlement planning and purposeful drafting, and include a provision in the settlement agreement that the court will retain jurisdiction over any disputes that arise regarding the settlement agreement. Where the court of original jurisdiction is a federal court, the parties may be able to consent to such a court retaining jurisdiction, at least for a reasonable time period.

The United States District Court for the District of New Jersey recently weighed in on this option in Brass Smith, LLC v. RPI Industries, Inc.,1 a patent infringement case where, according to the terms of the parties' settlement agreement, the defendant was required to cease "making, selling, offering to sell, or importing" an allegedly infringing device by June 1, 2012, and to stop shipments by Aug. 15, 2012. The settlement agreement called for the district court to retain "subject matter and personal jurisdiction to enforce the agreement and resolve any disputes pertaining to it," including compliance with its terms. In accordance with the settlement agreement, the parties moved for an order of dismissal under F.R.C.P. 41(a)(2). They requested the court incorporate into the dismissal order a provision in which it would retain indefinite enforcement jurisdiction over the settlement agreement. In the court's opinion, this request raised several issues regarding its duty or discretion to retain such jurisdiction, including whether it could alter the terms of the settlement agreement and whether its retention of jurisdiction was subject to any time limits.2

The Brass Smith panel began by explaining that federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction, which only draw their jurisdiction power from explicit grants by Congress and from Article III of the United States Constitution.3 As a result, federal courts may not exercise jurisdiction where none exists, even where parties consent to such jurisdiction.4 In fact, as it relates to the issue at hand, the United States Supreme Court has held that even where a federal court exercised proper jurisdiction over an underlying dispute, a request to enforce the resulting settlement agreement is more than a mere continuation or renewal of the former litigation, and hence requires its own basis for jurisdiction.5 This holding does not mean, however, that a federal court can never retain enforcement jurisdiction over a settlement agreement. To the contrary, as the Brass Smith court explained, through the doctrine of ancillary jurisdiction, a federal court may assert jurisdiction over a matter that it normally would not have jurisdiction over if the matter is incidental to other matters properly before the court.6

As the leading treatise on federal practice and procedure explains:

Under this concept, a district court acquires jurisdiction of a case or controversy in its entirety, and, as an incident to the full disposition of the matter, may hear collateral proceedings when necessary to allow it to vindicate its role as a tribunal. As the [Supreme] Court said in 1994, ancillary jurisdiction of this type is necessary "to enable a court to function successfully, that is, to manage its proceeding, vindicate its authority, and effectuate its decrees."7

Thus, if a federal court had jurisdiction over the principal action, it may hear an ancillary proceeding, regardless of the citizenship of the parties, the amount in controversy, or any other factor that normally would determine subject matter jurisdiction.

In Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance Company, the Supreme Court made clear, however, that a federal district court may only exercise ancillary jurisdiction to enforce a settlement agreement if the parties' obligations to comply with the settlement agreement have been made part of the order of dismissal either: 1) by an expressed provision in the order, or 2) by explicit incorporation of the settlement agreement into the order.8 In that case, the parties executed a settlement agreement but the stipulation and order of dismissal made no reference of the parties' settlement agreement or the court's continuing jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement. In reversing the district court's ruling that it had the "inherent power" to enforce the terms of the settlement agreement, the Supreme Court held that the district court had neither ancillary jurisdiction nor inherent power to enforce the settlement agreement where it was not mentioned in the order. Thus, it is critically important that parties seeking to retain a federal court's jurisdiction over any settlement agreement disputes make such a provision part of the order, as a judge's awareness and approval of the terms of the settlement agreement will not suffice.9

The Third Circuit adopted a strict reading of Kokkonen in Phar-Mor, Inc. Securities Litigation,10 where it held that incorporation of the phrase "pursuant to the terms of the Settlement" in the dismissal order was insufficient to confer subject matter jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement.11

While a federal court may retain jurisdiction to enforce a settlement agreement under the doctrine of ancillary jurisdiction,12 its decision to do so is discretionary.13 A federal court may, therefore: 1) retain jurisdiction to the extent requested by the parties, 2) decline to exercise ancillary jurisdiction in its entirety, or 3) modify the scope of ancillary jurisdiction requested by the parties.13 Assuming the court elects to retain jurisdiction over the enforcement of the settlement agreement, it must decide how long that retention of jurisdiction will last.

The maximum length of time over which a court may retain ancillary jurisdiction to enforce a settlement agreement has not been definitively addressed by the courts.14 A number of court decisions recognize that a length of time greater than the District of New Jersey's 60-day local rule (Local R. 41.1(b)) is acceptable, but do not go so far as to permit a period of indefinite retention. For example, in Holland v. New Jersey Department of Corrections,15 the Third Circuit accepted the district court's consent decree that explicitly retained jurisdiction for four years. Going even further, in Bronze Shields v. City of Newark,16 the District of New Jersey permitted the enforcement of a consent decree for 15 years after entry of the order. On the other hand, in McCall-Bey v. Franzen,17 a decision favorably relied upon by New Jersey courts, the Seventh Circuit noted that federal courts do not have authority to exercise ancillary jurisdiction indefinitely, and reasoned that a 20-year period of enforcement jurisdiction would "impermissibly strain the limits of federal court authority." A period of ancillary authority over a settlement agreement will most likely be considered reasonable if it corresponds to the period of time in which the parties are obligated to comply with the settlement agreement's terms.

In addition to setting forth an explicit retention period, the scope of the district court's ancillary jurisdiction should be addressed in the settlement agreement. For example, is the jurisdiction limited to enforcement of the settlement agreement? Is it to include any disputes relating to the settlement agreement? The narrower the proposed retention of jurisdiction, the more likely a court will be willing to extend that jurisdiction.

Accordingly, as part of the drafting process, employment practitioners should consider including specific language in the settlement agreement, and/or the order of dismissal, setting forth the presiding court's jurisdiction to address any suspected violations of the settlement agreement's terms and conditions, giving thought to the scope and length of such authority. If done properly, the parties may avoid the costs, time and resources associated with commencing a new action to enforce the terms of the settlement agreement.

Originally published in New Jersey Labor and Employment Law Quarterly, April 2013

Footnotes

1. 827 F. Supp. 2d 377 (D.N.J. 2011).

2. Brass Smith, at 377-80.

3. Brass Smith at 380 (citing Ins. Corp. of Ireland, Ltd. V. Compagnie des Bauxites de Guinee, 456 U.S. 694, 701-02 (1982)).

4. Brass Smith at 380 (citing Samuel-Bassett v. KIA Motors Am., Inc., 357 F.3d 392, 396 (3rd. Cir. 2004)).

5. Id.at 380 (citing Kokkonen at 378).

6. Id. at 380-81 (citing Kukkonen at 378).

7. 13 Charles Alan Wright, Arthur R. Miller, Edward H. Cooper and Richard D. Freer, Federal Practice and Procedure, § 3523.2 at 213 (3d Ed. 2008).

8. Kukkonen at 381.

9. Id.

10. 172 F.3d 270 (3d Cir. 1999).

11. Id. at 274.

12. Kukkonen at 381.

13. See Wright v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America, 285 F. Supp. 2d 515 (D.N.J. 2003).

14. See Glaxo Group Ltd. v. Dr. Reddy's Laboratories, Ltd., 325 F. Supp. 2d 502, 509 (D.N.J. 2004).

15. Brass Smith at 382.

16. 246 F.3d 267, 270 (3d Cir. 2001).

17. 214 F. Supp. 2d 443, 445 (D.N.J. 2002).

18. 777 F.2d 1178, 1187 (7th Cir. 1985).

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions