How is a settlement agreement in a civil case approved? While reading a very informative answer to a previous question: Plaintiff didn&#39;t respond to discovery - and later settled - can I get any legal fees back? I came across "the court may need to approve the settlement." I have several follow up questions When does a court need to approve a settlement? (For example, a civil case in New Jersey.) What is the process? Who reads it and what do they look for? If the settlement is approved by a court, how big is the discrepancy between a contract that is approved by the the court and one which can later be deemed non enforceable? From what I read on the internet, a contract should not forbid someone from reporting a crime, but my contract explicitly forbids me from making any complaint with the Attorney General. Is there a reason the process should take over a year? We had both signed and dated a settlement agreement. Over a year later I was applying for jobs, and was trying to explain to potential employers that "well, if you do look me up in the ACMS this case is active but we signed the contract over a year ago." Needless to say, I didn't get any offers.
Only certain types of cases require the court's approval for a settlement. Typically, these are class actions, domestic relations cases involving the division of debt/assets and child custody/support, civil rights cases – especially under 42 USC sec. 1983 – whereby the court will often need to approve and oversee consent decrees, certain suits brought by the attorney general on behalf of, and inter-pleading a consumer, and especially any civil action where the plaintiff is a minor, as well as a handful of other less common types of cases. 1) How do I know if the court needs to approve a settlement? (For example, a civil case in New Jersey) If there is an attorney involved, they will let you know. Also, depending on jurisdiction, your scheduling order may say something like &quot;any settlements in compromise require court approval and a hearing on same.&quot; (I saw NJ: When I say jurisdiction, I mean this can differ between state and federal court.) If there are no lawyers involved and you're not sure, when the stipulation of dismissal is sent to the court, they will let you know that the agreement requires court approval and the case will not be dismissed until this occurs. This is, in the grand scheme of things, highly atypical. Generally, in a non-domestic civil matter that is not a color of law claim (alleging a government actor violated your civil rights), the court is not party to your settlement agreement. 2) What is the process? Who reads it and what do they look for? In the cases when it is necessary, the court will review the settlement agreement. The process is simple: just a quick hearing where the judge will have already read the agreement (because it will be required to be submitted prior to the hearing) to be sure that it is fair and equitable. The types of cases that typically require court approval are specifically those types wherein one party is seen to be in a position of disadvantage (or in a divorce case, because often they use a mediator so the court needs to review it and ask the parties if they agree, also to advise them of their rights, to make sure child support is calculated correctly, and to make sure one party is not coerced into giving up visitation in exchange for monetary relief). The court will go over the terms of the agreements in these specific matters, and will then ask each party if they realize that they are forever waiving their right to seek further relief, or mount a defense, and that their case will be dismissed with prejudice. 3) If the settlement is approved by a court, how big is the discrepancy between a contract that is approved by the court and one which can later be deemed non enforceable? From what I read on the internet, a contract should not forbid someone from reporting a crime, but my contract explicitly forbids me from making any complaint with the Attorney General. I cannot really comment on what your agreement states with regard to reports to the AG. If it was a whistleblower claim, they can bar you from bringing a suit under whistle blower protections if you are settling that claim, or can require a confidentiality agreement and not to file charges for crimes where you were the victim and you are being compensated civilly, but it cannot bar you from filing a criminal complaint that you have a duty to report, and certain things are not able to be contractually controlled. Whether you are Plaintiff or Defendant, I hope you have a lawyer if you are entering into a settlement of a civil suit that arose from the commission of a crime. This is getting into murky area and I would need specific facts and need to give you specific legal advice to answer this question. HERE IS A LINK to an article on this issue; whether or not it will be relevant I cannot guess. 4) Is there a reason the process should take over a year? We had both signed and dated a settlement agreement. Over a year later I was applying for jobs, and was trying to explain to potential employers that &quot;well, if you do look me up in the ACMS this case is active but we signed the contract over a year ago.&quot; Needless to say, I didn't get any offers. No! If your case was settled over a year ago, your case should be dismissed by now. That is unless you are one member of a class action, and that claim still exists for the other members, or if there were multiple parties (but not a class) and the case is still going on for the others, but even if this is the case, you should have been dismissed out. Typically, when an agreement is reached, the case is dismissed immediately. It sounds like this was an employment law claim. Was it actually filed in court, or are you referring by chance, to an EEOC case that is still pending? Regardless, you should check with your lawyer, or opposing counsel if you were pro se to see why the dismissal has not been filed. You should also be able to contact the clerk to be sure the case was dismissed.
D should be subpoenaing anything and everything they need from anyone and everyone, including E. No matter how good terms you are on, if you are involved in a lawsuit you should not be relying on anyone's good faith to supply you what you need. Suppose you ask nicely and they say yes but, for whatever reason, they don't supply them by your court date. Without a subpoena, if you ask for a continuance the judge will say "tough t*^%^$s"; with a subpoena they will say " Yes certainly, oh, and Mr Sheriff, here is a warrant for the documents, go and get them for me please. Oh and a warrant for the arrest of the person who ignored my subpoena." Where do you want to be?
We can assume there was a meeting of the minds when the contract was drafted, and both parties expected payments to me made based on product usage. Plaintiff alleges that this did not happen. Thus plaintiff is indeed alleging that the contract was breached. Now plaintiff alleges that defendant broke the contract, while defendant counters that plaintiff broke the contract. "[T]o be determined by tracking software" is woefully ambiguous. The court will want to know which party drafted the contract, as disputes arising from ambiguity are often resolved in favor of the non-drafting party.
Common Law Contracts Contracts do not have to be signed. They do not even have to be written down. In fact, the overwhelming majority of contracts entered into are not written &ndash; when did you last sign a contract to buy a cup of coffee? See What is a contract and what is required for them to be valid? A contract is an enforceable agreement. It exists from the moment that agreement was reached irrespective of who signed what. Putting a signature on a contract is evidence of the contract: it is not the contract. Real Estate Having said this, real estate law is an area where legislators can't leave the common law alone and is generally subject to specific regulation. For example, it is quite common that real estate contracts must be in writing and are unenforceable if they are not. However, while the contract may not be enforceable, the promise might be. Promissory Estoppel The common law as we know it today is actually derived from two different stands of English law: the actual common law as decided by the magistrates, and equity law as decided by the King/Queen in the courts of Chancellery. In the absence of a contract there is nothing the common law can enforce. However, principles of equity law are grounded in notions of fairness (or equity &ndash; see how that works?). If I were to make a promise to you (that was not a contract) and you took action on the strength of my promise that would be to your detriment and I knew you were doing that: promissory estoppel would prevent me from breaking my promise or allow you to recover damages (more or less &ndash; in practice a promissory estoppel suit is usually an act of desperation). Your lease When was the contract formed? If the agreement had been reached and the written lease simply documented that agreement without adding anything new, then the contract is already on foot and both Aaron and Bob are bound. If agreement has not been reached or there were additional terms in the document (which there almost certainly would be) then by putting forward the document Aaron is making an offer to Bob. By extending the offer, Aaron knows that he cannot lease the premises to someone else until the offer has been rejected or he withdraws the offer: this is true irrespective of whether Aaron has signed or not. If Bob accepts that offer without changing it, then the contract exists from the moment of Bob's acceptance irrespective of whether he has signed. If Bob makes changes (other than inconsequential ones) then he has made a counteroffer: the ball is now in Aaron's court and the original offer is dead. Promissory estoppel can arise if, for example, the negotiations ends with Bob saying, "I'm looking at several places but yours would be the one I want if you were to change the carpets," Aaron send Bob carpet samples, Bob picks one, Aaron makes the change, and Bob then walks away.
Are arbitration agreements subject to a 6 year statute of limitations in NJ? Yes. Remember the precedents from NJ that I cited in response to one of your recent posts: a state may not &quot;subject an arbitration agreement to more burdensome requirements than those governing the formation of other contracts&quot; This implies that the statute of limitations for arbitration agreements is the same as for contracts in general. If it were otherwise, that departure would constitute a greater burden on whichever party happens to oppose the enforcement of the arbitration agreement.
As a matter of contract law it would not be possible to enforce a requirement to pay legal fees without agreement. You could easily see how this would be problematic: one could just draft letters to hundreds or thousands of people and require them to pay the costs of composing the letter. My understanding is that this is common practice in the United States (see speculative invoicing). However, people are generally free to pay whatever they want to anyone they want. The other side is free to pay the legal costs, they just probably won't. In some common law jurisdictions, the concept of a Calderbank offer may be another reason to write a letter such as this; the settlement offer can be relied upon in later proceedings as an indication as to the costs that would be appropriate to award to the winning party, should the offeree unnecessarily prolong legal proceedings
It sounds to me like the parties made proposals with an intent to draw them up and formalize them but didn't intend to form binding agreements. The first agreement sounds vague. The second was committed to writing, suggesting that the written deal was to be the real agreement, and not executed. In the last case, it doesn't appear that there was an agreement because there was no meeting of the minds on the essential term, which was the price. Going to court is expensive. It is expensive whether this is litigating underlying disputes or trying to enforce an alleged oral settlement that is disputed. Also, settlement discussions that don't result in a resolution are not admissible as evidence in court. Making a deal would be nice, but Dave's concept of what constitutes a deal seems to be out of touch with reality.
The issue you describe is usually characterized as the multijurisdictional practice of law and is not terribly straightforward, in part, because the "practice of law" is not a well defined or consistently defined term. For example, in New York, preparation of a title opinion is considered to be the practice of law, while in Colorado, it is not and title opinions are routinely prepared by non-lawyers in title companies and by a type of independent paraprofessional (with no formal licensing) known as a "landman". As a rule of thumb: All work involving law in a jurisdiction where you are not admitted is subject to the ethical requirement that you be actually competent to render the opinion regardless of your formal licensure, and Normally, work involving law in a jurisdiction where you are not admitted must be incident to your representation of a client in a state where you are admitted to practice. A leading analysis of the issues related to multijurisdictional practice is a 2002 report of the American Bar Association on the subject, much of which has been incorporated into the rules of professional ethics for attorneys of many states. The core rule of professional conduct that was proposed and adopted in identical or similar form by many states from that report is as follows: Rule 5.5 Unauthorized Practice Of Law; Multijurisdictional Practice Of Law (a) A lawyer shall not practice law in a jurisdiction in violation of the regulation of the legal profession in that jurisdiction, or assist another in doing so. (b) A lawyer who is not admitted to practice in this jurisdiction shall not: (1) except as authorized by these Rules or other law, establish an office or other systematic and continuous presence in this jurisdiction for the practice of law; or (2) hold out to the public or otherwise represent that the lawyer is admitted to practice law in this jurisdiction. (c) A lawyer admitted in another United States jurisdiction, and not disbarred or suspended from practice in any jurisdiction, may provide legal services on a temporary basis in this jurisdiction that: (1) are undertaken in association with a lawyer who is admitted to practice in this jurisdiction and who actively participates in the matter; (2) are in or reasonably related to a pending or potential proceeding before a tribunal in this or another jurisdiction, if the lawyer, or a person the lawyer is assisting, is authorized by law or order to appear in such proceeding or reasonably expects to be so authorized; (3) are in or reasonably related to a pending or potential arbitration, mediation, or other alternative resolution proceeding in this or another jurisdiction, if the services arise out of or are reasonably related to the lawyer's practice in a jurisdiction in which the lawyer is admitted to practice and are not services for which the forum requires pro hac vice admission; or (4) are not within paragraphs (c) (2) or (c)(3) and arise out of or are reasonably related to the lawyer's practice in a jurisdiction in which the lawyer is admitted to practice. (d) A lawyer admitted in another United States jurisdiction or in a foreign jurisdiction, and not disbarred or suspended from practice in any jurisdiction or the equivalent thereof, or a person otherwise lawfully practicing as an in-house counsel under the laws of a foreign jurisdiction, may provide legal services through an office or other systematic and continuous presence in this jurisdiction that: (1) are provided to the lawyer's employer or its organizational affiliates, are not services for which the forum requires pro hac vice admission; and when performed by a foreign lawyer and requires advice on the law of this or another U.S. jurisdiction or of the United States, such advice shall be based upon the advice of a lawyer who is duly licensed and authorized by the jurisdiction to provide such advice; or (2) are services that the lawyer is authorized by federal or other law or rule to provide in this jurisdiction. (e) For purposes of paragraph (d): (1) the foreign lawyer must be a member in good standing of a recognized legal profession in a foreign jurisdiction, the members of which are admitted to practice as lawyers or counselors at law or the equivalent, and subject to effective regulation and discipline by a duly constituted professional body or a public authority; or, (2) the person otherwise lawfully practicing as an in-house counsel under the laws of a foreign jurisdiction must be authorized to practice under this rule by, in the exercise of its discretion, [the highest court of this jurisdiction]. The meaning of the rule quoted above is discussed in official and unofficial commentary beginning at page 19 of the ABA Report.