Brenda L. Shaffer v. Gte North, Inc

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that an order containing the same language as the first decretal paragraph of the January 31, 2002 order could not legitimize the exercise of ancillary jurisdiction over disputes about the settlement agreement
• holding that language in a dismissal order that provides for the reinstatement of a case if the settlement agreement fails to be consummated is not an explicit retention of enforcement jurisdiction under Kokkonen
• finding that although the court’s order stated that either party “upon good cause shown, [may] reinstate the action within sixty (60
• finding that the ability to reinstate action with sixty (60) days does not mean that a district court retains jurisdiction over the enforcement of settlement
• determining that because the terms of the settlement agreement were not made part of the order of dismissal, the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction
• holding, post -Kokkonen, that a district court lacked jurisdiction to enforce a settle ment whose terms had been recited of record

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).