From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

St. Clair v. Aerotek Automotive

United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Eastern Division
Sep 7, 2007
1:05CV1774 (N.D. Ohio Sep. 7, 2007)

Opinion

1:05CV1774.

September 7, 2007


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER


This action was dismissed by the court on June 2, 2006, based on the parties' representation that the case had been settled. The court retained jurisdiction to vacate the dismissal, upon cause shown that the settlement had not been completed. (Doc. 23.)

The plaintiff, Jane St. Clair ("St. Clair"), has filed a "Motion to enforce oral in court settlement and/or written settlement," on June 27, 2007. St. Clair claims that the defendants have failed to fulfill the settlement agreement. (Doc. 24.)

To date, the defendants have not responded to the St. Clair's motion. The defendants are hereby ORDERED to respond to the motion to enforce the settlement agreement, on or before Wednesday, Sept. 12, 2007.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

St. Clair v. Aerotek Automotive

United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Eastern Division
Sep 7, 2007
1:05CV1774 (N.D. Ohio Sep. 7, 2007)
Case details for

St. Clair v. Aerotek Automotive

Case Details

Full title:JANE ST. CLAIR, Plaintiff, v. AEROTEK AUTOMOTIVE, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Eastern Division

Date published: Sep 7, 2007

Citations

1:05CV1774 (N.D. Ohio Sep. 7, 2007)