UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
July 1, 2008
RON CHAVEZ, DBA SAN DIEGO CONSTRUCTION WELDING, PLAINTIFF,
INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST, HAR CONSTRUCTION, INC., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Leo S. Papas U.S. Magistrate Judge
ORDER REGARDING LANGUAGE TO BE PLACED IN THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
On April 9, 2008, the parties settled the above-entitled action. On May 1, 2008, the parties consented to the jurisdiction of the undersigned to decide, inter alia, all disputes regarding settlement terms arising during the documentation thereof not resolved by the parties themselves. The parties also stipulated, inter alia, that any decision by the undersigned regarding documentation of the settlement shall be binding and from which the parties specifically waive any right to appeal.
On June 18, 2008, the Court received a letter and a pleading from Plaintiff's counsel and Defendants' counsel respectively, detailing a dispute between the parties regarding language to be placed in their Settlement Agreement.
The Court has reviewed and considered both the letter and pleading. The Court is cognizant that resolution between the parties must effectuate the parties' intent and must have finality, to the extent possible. Therefore, having reviewed the language proposed by the parties, the Court concludes that the language proposed by Plaintiff more adequately effectuates the parties' intent and addresses the finality sought in concluding the parties' disputes.
Therefore, paragraphs 8, 9 and 10, as proposed by Plaintiff (See Defendant Har Construction, Inc.'s Statement Re Settlement Language, Exh. 3) shall be used by the parties in the settlement documentation, with one exception:
At paragraph 10, the fifth word of the first sentence ("timely") shall be changed to the word "future."
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.