Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

JR14, LLC v. JetCorp Technical Services, Inc., 4:17 CV 1469 RWS. (2018)

Court: District Court, E.D. Missouri Number: infdco20180403b66 Visitors: 7
Filed: Apr. 02, 2018
Latest Update: Apr. 02, 2018
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RODNEY W. SIPPEL , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on defendant's "motion for settlement." [46]. The Court was notified that this case (not just certain claims) was settled on March 5, 2018. Defendant now asks the Court to enter some kind of Order finding that "the settlement of this case was just, fair, and reasonable, and entered into good faith, [and] barring any present or future third-party claims or cross-claims against Flying Colors for contribu
More

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court on defendant's "motion for settlement." [46]. The Court was notified that this case (not just certain claims) was settled on March 5, 2018. Defendant now asks the Court to enter some kind of Order finding that "the settlement of this case was just, fair, and reasonable, and entered into good faith, [and] barring any present or future third-party claims or cross-claims against Flying Colors for contribution, equitable indemnity, or implied indemnity."

The motion will be denied as defendant has provided no adequate legal basis for the Court entering such an Order. The cases cited by defendant in support of this requested relief are either class actions or cases involving specific state statutes relating to settlement and contribution among joint tortfeasors. Yet defendant does not point to a specific state statute which applies here and requires such a finding. Moreover, defendant brought a third-party complaint alleging joint liability and has never moved for default or default judgment against the third-party defendants even though they have yet to enter an appearance in this case. If defendant thinks it is entitled to the requested relief then it should file a second motion which adequately sets out the reason for requesting this relief, the asserted legal basis for granting this relief, and what impact, if any, it has on the third-party defendants. Because I gave the parties until May to complete their settlement, I will not dismiss the case with prejudice at this time. However, I will do so on May 5, 2018, absent an appropriate motion.

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that "motion for settlement" [46] is denied.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for leave to file exhibit under seal [48] is granted.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer