Metzger v. Travelers Home and Marine Insurance Company, 1:18-cv-03122-RM-NRN. (2019)
Court: District Court, D. Colorado
Number: infdco20191108e06
Visitors: 11
Filed: Nov. 07, 2019
Latest Update: Nov. 07, 2019
Summary: ORDER RAYMOND P. MOORE , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on a Motion to Enforce Settlement (ECF No. 38). The Court vacated its previous order (ECF No. 50) granting the Motion after learning that Plaintiff had filed a Reply (ECF No. 51) that was timely, even though it did not appear on the docket until after the previous Order had issued. Having reviewed the Reply, the Court now finds that an enforceable agreement to settle for $100,000 exists between Plaintiff and Defendant
Summary: ORDER RAYMOND P. MOORE , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on a Motion to Enforce Settlement (ECF No. 38). The Court vacated its previous order (ECF No. 50) granting the Motion after learning that Plaintiff had filed a Reply (ECF No. 51) that was timely, even though it did not appear on the docket until after the previous Order had issued. Having reviewed the Reply, the Court now finds that an enforceable agreement to settle for $100,000 exists between Plaintiff and Defendant ..
More
ORDER
RAYMOND P. MOORE, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on a Motion to Enforce Settlement (ECF No. 38). The Court vacated its previous order (ECF No. 50) granting the Motion after learning that Plaintiff had filed a Reply (ECF No. 51) that was timely, even though it did not appear on the docket until after the previous Order had issued. Having reviewed the Reply, the Court now finds that an enforceable agreement to settle for $100,000 exists between Plaintiff and Defendant Travelers Home and Marine Insurance Company ("Travelers").
In its Motion, Travelers asserts that an agreement to settle was memorialized in several e-mails between it and Plaintiff's counsel, who had apparent authority to act on Plaintiff's behalf. Travelers has adduced evidence to support this assertion. Although Plaintiff is no longer represented by his previous counsel and now asserts that he did not agree to the settlement, he has made no argument nor adduced any evidence that would show that the settlement is not valid.
Therefore, the Court GRANTS the Motion to Enforce Settlement (ECF No. 38); ORDERS that Plaintiff shall comply with the terms of the settlement agreement, including executing a full release and dismissal, with prejudice, of all claims against Travelers; and further ORDERS that Plaintiff shall pay Travelers attorney fees and costs associated with seeking judicial enforcement of the settlement agreement.
Source: Leagle
