From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lott v. Performance Toyota, Inc.

United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division
Mar 15, 2006
Case No. 8:01-cv-2460-T-30TGW (M.D. Fla. Mar. 15, 2006)

Opinion

Case No. 8:01-cv-2460-T-30TGW.

March 15, 2006


ORDER


THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Plaintiff's Opposed Motion to Reopen Case to Enforce Settlement and Final Judgment (Dkt. 72), Defendant's Motion of Miracle of Central Florida, Inc. For Leave to File Response Under Seal (Dkt. #73), and Defendant John T. Macaluso's Motion to Extend Time to Respond to Plaintiff's Motion to Reopen Case to Enforce Settlement Agreement and General Release and Incorporated Memorandum of Law in Support Thereof (Dkt. #75). The Court, having considered the motions, memoranda, and being otherwise advised in the premises, finds that Plaintiff's Opposed Motion to Reopen Case to Enforce Settlement and Final Judgment should be denied.

On October 25, 2003, the parties completely settled this case at Mediation (Dkt. #66). On November 3, 2003, this Court entered an Order of Dismissal dismissing this case without prejudice subject to the right of any party to re-open the action within sixty (60) days, but that after the 60-day period dismissal would be with prejudice (Dkt. #65). As a result of this Court's Order of Dismissal this case was closed by the Clerk. Over a year and a half later, on June 27, 2005, the parties filed a Stipulated Motion to Reopen Case for Entry of Final Judgment (Dkt. #69). On June 30, 2005, this Court entered an Order granting in part and denying in part the Stipulated Motion to Reopen Case for Entry of Final Judgment and directed the Clerk to enter a judgment in favor of Plaintiff, Lee Ann Lott, against Defendants, Performance Toyota, Inc. d/b/a Miracle Toyota, and John T. Macaluso, jointly and severally, in the amount of $275,000.00, plus interest at a rate of seven percent (7%) from November 14, 2003 (Dkt. #70). Accordingly, the Clerk entered a Judgment In A Civil Case in favor of Plaintiff against Defendants (Dkt. #71). This Court did not reserve jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement between the parties. Plaintiff's remedy appears to be to execute on the Final Judgment against Defendants.

It is therefore ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that:

1. Plaintiff's Opposed Motion to Reopen Case to Enforce Settlement and Final Judgment (Dkt. 72) is DENIED.

2. Defendant's Motion of Miracle of Central Florida, Inc. For Leave to File Response Under Seal (Dkt. #73) is DENIED as moot.

3. Defendant John T. Macaluso's Motion to Extend Time to Respond to Plaintiff's Motion to Reopen Case to Enforce Settlement Agreement and General Release and Incorporated Memorandum of Law in Support Thereof (Dkt. #75) is DENIED as moot.

DONE and ORDERED.


Summaries of

Lott v. Performance Toyota, Inc.

United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division
Mar 15, 2006
Case No. 8:01-cv-2460-T-30TGW (M.D. Fla. Mar. 15, 2006)
Case details for

Lott v. Performance Toyota, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:LEE ANN LOTT Plaintiff, v. PERFORMANCE TOYOTA, INC., d/b/a MIRACLE TOYOTA…

Court:United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division

Date published: Mar 15, 2006

Citations

Case No. 8:01-cv-2460-T-30TGW (M.D. Fla. Mar. 15, 2006)