Pope v. US, 323 U.S. 1, 12 (1944); Mastercraft Fabrics Corp. v. Dickson Elberton Mills Inc., 821 F.Supp. 1503, 1510 (M.D. Ga. 1993). Under Georgia law, a court's review of a motion to enforce a settlement agreement by consent is similar to the analysis court's undertake in reviewing a motion for summary judgment. Jackson v. Cooper Lighting, LLC, No. 1:11-cv-067-WLS, 2013 WL 1501611, at *1 (M.D. Ga. 2013); see e.g. Ballard v. Williams, 476 S.E.2d. 783, 784 (Ga. Ct. App. 1996). When analyzing a settlement agreement courts must decide whether the movant has shown "that the documents, affidavits, depositions and other evidence in the record reveal that there is no evidence sufficient to create a jury issue on at least one essential element of the plaintiff's case."

Under Georgia law, a Court's review of a motion to enforce a settlement agreement is similar to the analysis that a Court undertakes in reviewing a motion for summary judgment. Cohen v. Dekalb Cnty. Sch. Dist., No. 1:09-cv-1153, 2009 WL 4261161, at *4 (N.D. Ga. Nov. 25, 2009) (citing Ballard v. Williams, 223 Ga. App. 1, 1 (1996)). Thus, applying state contract law, the Court determines whether the movant has shown "that the documents, affidavits, depositions and other evidence in the record reveal that there is no evidence sufficient to create a jury issue on at least one essential element of the plaintiff's case."

Finally, Jett's letter satisfies the writing requirement for settlement agreements whose existence or terms are in dispute. See Brumbelow , 251 Ga. at 676, 308 S.E.2d 544 (citing OCGA § 15-19-5 ) (explaining that "[o]rdinarily, for an attorney to bind his client to a settlement agreement where there is a dispute as to terms, the agreement must be in writing," and "letters or documents prepared by attorneys which memorialize the terms of the agreement" satisfy that requirement); see, e.g., Vildibill v. Palmer Johnson of Savannah, Inc. , 244 Ga. App. 747, 749 (1), 536 S.E.2d 779 (2000) (attorney's letter accepting settlement offer established an enforceable agreement); Ballard v. Williams , 223 Ga. App. 1, 2, 476 S.E.2d 783 (1996) (attorney's letter referring to an oral settlement reached months earlier "was enough to satisfy the writing requirement"). Cf. Turner , 321 Ga. App. at 213 (1), 738 S.E.2d 712 (attorney's letter proposing use of a different release form was a counteroffer rather than an acceptance where offer was conditioned on execution of particular release); Torres v. Elkin , 317 Ga. App. 135, 142-43 (2), 730 S.E.2d 518 (2012) (purported acceptance letter expressing the assumption that the offeror would be satisfying all liens was a counteroffer rather than an acceptance where offer was silent about liens).

(Citation and punctuation omitted.) Ballard v. Williams, 223 Ga. App. 1 ( 476 S.E.2d 783) (1996). Under our law,

The issues raised on an appeal from a denial of a motion to enforce settlement are analogous to those in a motion for summary judgment. Superglass Windshield Repair v. Mitchell, 233 Ga. App. 200 ( 504 S.E.2d 38) (1998); Ballard v. Williams, 223 Ga. App. 1 ( 476 S.E.2d 783) (1996). Therefore, "the opposing party should be given the benefit of all reasonable doubt, and the court should construe the evidence and all inferences and conclusions therefrom most favorably toward the party opposing the motion."

" (Punctuation omitted.) Ballard v. Williams, 223 Ga. App. 1 ( 476 S.E.2d 783) (1996). On January 21, 1997, Mitchell filed this action against Superglass, David A. Casey, William C. Costello, S. Martin Agnew, Jr., and Ramona W. Agnew. All of the individuals named were members of Superglass' board of directors.

“To prevail, a party must show the court that the documents, affidavits, depositions and other evidence in the record reveal that there is no evidence sufficient to create a jury issue on at least one essential element of the plaintiff's case.” Ballard v. Williams, 223 Ga.App. 1, 1 (1996) (quotation marks and citation omitted).

"Under Georgia law, a motion to enforce a settlement agreement is evaluated under the standards similar to a motion for summary judgment," Cohen v. DeKalb Cnty. Sch. Dist., No. 1:09-CV-1153-WSD, 2009 WL 4261161, at *4 (N.D. Ga. Nov. 25, 2009) (citing Ballard v. Williams, 223 Ga. App. 1, 476 S.E. 2d 783, 784 (1996)), with the moving party bearing the burden of showing that there was an enforceable settlement agreement, see Francis v. Chavis, 345 Ga.App. 641, 814 S.E.2d 778, 779 (2018).

Additionally, pursuant to this Court's order granting leave to file excess pages, this Court will not disregard the motion.Ballard v. Williams, 223 Ga.App. 1, 476 S.E.2d 783 (1996). Local Rule 56.1D.

Under Georgia law, a motion to enforce a settlement agreement is evaluated under the standards similar to a motion for summary judgment. Ballard v. Williams, 476 S.E.2d 783, 784 (Ga. Ct. App. 1996). "To prevail, a party must show the court that the documents, affidavits, depositions and other evidence in the record reveal that there is no evidence sufficient to create a jury issue on at least one essential element of the [plaintiff's] case."