Dove v. USAA Casualty Insurance Company

CourtDistrict Court, M.D. Florida
DecidedJanuary 31, 2022
Docket2:21-cv-00205
StatusUnknown

This text of Dove v. USAA Casualty Insurance Company (Dove v. USAA Casualty Insurance Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, M.D. Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Dove v. USAA Casualty Insurance Company, (M.D. Fla. 2022).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION

ADA DOVE,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No: 2:21-cv-205-JLB-NPM

USAA CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendant.

ORDER Plaintiff has reported a settlement. (Doc. 27.) However, Plaintiff also asks that the Court reserve jurisdiction “to hear motions for equitable distribution on any medical bills or liens, if necessary.” (Id. at 1.) “Plaintiff asserts that reservations like this are important to the overall settlement analysis and conducive to the orderly settlements of personal injury cases without the need for trial.” (Id.) Plaintiff also advises that Defendant does not object to the request. (Id.) As an initial matter, Court’s retention of jurisdiction over a case to enforce a settlement agreement is not automatic. Express retention of jurisdiction to enforce a settlement agreement is the functional equivalent of a consent decree, Am. Disability Ass’n, Inc. v. Chmielarz, 289 F.3d 1315, 1320 (11th Cir. 2002), and a consent decree will not be entered based on “perfunctory [court] approval.” United States v. City of Miami, 664 F.2d 435, 441 (5th Cir. 1981) (en banc) (Rubin, J., concurring). For these reasons, Plaintiff’s motion (Doc. 27) is due to be denied without prejudice. Plaintiff may renew the motion and, if so, must present an actual, agreed-upon settlement. Any renewed motion must also set forth the factual or legal basis for the Court to retain jurisdiction. See generally Order, Golden Gate Chiropractic Ctr. Inc. v. Nationwide Ins. Co. of Am., No. 2:20-cv-849- JLB-NPM (M.D. Fla. Dec. 18, 2020), ECF No. 11. Accordingly, itis ORDERED: 1. Plaintiff's motion (Doc. 27) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 2. Plaintiff may renew the motion (Doc. 27) in compliance with this Order, on or before February 7, 2022. 3. Pursuant to Local Rule 3.09(b), the Clerk is DIRECTED to terminate any pending deadlines and administratively close the file. If Plaintiff does not renew the motion, then the parties are DIRECTED to file the appropriate dismissal documents or move to reopen the case upon good cause shown for further proceedings within sixty (60) days of this Order or upon the expiration of a later date established by the Court. Failure to comply with this Order will result in the dismissal of this action with prejudice and without further notice. ORDERED at Fort Myers, Florida, on January 31, 2022.

JOHN L. BADALAMENTI UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

American Disability Assoc. v. Ariel Chmielarz
289 F.3d 1315 (Eleventh Circuit, 2002)
United States v. City of Miami
664 F.2d 435 (Fifth Circuit, 1981)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Dove v. USAA Casualty Insurance Company, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dove-v-usaa-casualty-insurance-company-flmd-2022.