Settlement Dismissal Orders
Before submitting a proposed order of dismissal, counsel should review Seventh Circuit case law regarding the retention of
federal jurisdiction to enforce the terms of a settlement agreement, including
Dupuy v. McEwen, 495 F.3d 807 (7th Cir. 2007); Blue Cross & Blue Shield Association v. American Express Co.,
467 F.3d 634 (7th Cir. 2006);
Shapo v. Engle,
463 F.3d 641 (7th Cir. 2006); and
Lynch, Inc. v. SamataMason Inc.,
279 F.3d 487 (7th Cir. 2002).
In general, Seventh Circuit decisions hold that dismissals "with prejudice"
leave the Court without jurisdiction to enforce a settlement agreement. Accordingly, in most cases, the parties would be well
advised to submit a proposed order that either (a) provides for dismissal with prejudice if the settlement terms have already
been fulfilled (e.g., payment has been made), but make no reference to retention of jurisdiction; or (b) provides for
the case to be "dismissed without prejudice with leave to reinstate on or before [date far enough in the future to fulfill
all settlement terms]. Thereafter, the case shall be deemed, without further order of the Court,
to be dismissed with prejudice."
|