Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of America

How courts have described this case

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

• ruling that because the dismissal order did not retain jurisdiction or incorporate the terms of the settlement agreement, there was no post-dismissal ancillary jurisdiction
• holding that \the party seeking to invoke the court's jurisdiction bears the burden of establishing that jurisdiction exists\
• concluding that a party’s motion to enforce a settlement agreement was a claim for breach of contract, ie., the settlement agreement
• holding that under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a), a court may retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of a settlement
• holding that a district court lacks jurisdiction to enforce a settlement agreement unless the court retains jurisdiction over the agreement or incorporates the terms of the agreement into its dismissal order
• holding that the district court was without jurisdiction to enforce a settlement agreement even though the substance of the agreement was read into the record

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).