797 F.3d 83
1st Cir.2015Background
- Román-Oliveras sued PREPA, a supervisor, and plant superintendent under ADA, Title VII, §1983, and Puerto Rico laws alleging disability- and union-related discrimination.
- Settlement negotiations occurred in July 2012 in chambers; Judge Delgado-Colón memorialized an oral settlement in December 2012.
- The parties did not submit a final written agreement; the unsigned instrument circulated later was viewed as reflecting the oral terms.
- Judge Delgado-Colón recused in May 2013 after finding a binding oral settlement; Judge Gelpí later ordered show cause to enforce it.
- Gelpí dismissed the case with prejudice and ordered PREPA to deposit the settlement amount; the district court then treated pending drafts as capturing the terms of the oral settlement.
- Appellate review focused on whether Kokkonen required an independent basis for jurisdiction to enforce the settlement and whether the district court properly enforced a pre-dismissal oral settlement.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a binding oral settlement existed. | Román-Oliveras contends no binding agreement. | PREPA argues a binding oral settlement existed. | Yes; the district court properly found a binding oral settlement. |
| Whether Kokkonen bars enforcement without an independent jurisdictional basis. | Kokkonen requires independent jurisdiction to enforce post-dismissal settlements. | The suit was not dismissed when enforcement occurred; jurisdiction existed. | Kokkonen does not bar enforcement where the underlying suit is ongoing or has not been dismissed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375 (U.S. Supreme Court 1994) (post-dismissal enforcement requires independent jurisdiction; not applicable if suit is still active)
- Malave v. Carney Hosp., 170 F.3d 217 (1st Cir. 1999) (enforcement of settlements before dismissal possible; weight given to district record)
- Fid. & Guar. Ins. Co. v. Star Equip. Corp., 541 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2008) (same principle; enforcement without separate basis when settlement imminent)
- Bandera v. City of Quincy, 344 F.3d 47 (1st Cir. 2003) (district court may need evidentiary hearing to enforce alleged settlement)
- Mathewson Corp. v. Allied Marine Indus., Inc., 827 F.2d 850 (1st Cir. 1987) (recognizes implicit concession and use of federal law in settlement issues)