Hall v. Inmate Services Corporation

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS NORTHERN DIVISION

CHRISTINA HALL, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated PLAINTIFF

No. 3:18-cv-235-DPM

INMATE SERVICES CORPORATION; and RANDY CAGLIE, JR. DEFENDANTS

DAVID DILLARD and NICOLAS WILLIAMS PLAINTIFFS

v. No. 2:19-cv-150-DPM

INMATE SERVICES CORPORATION; and RANDY CAGLE, JR. DEFENDANTS ORDER Hall’s 27 January 2023 motion to extend the Court's subject matter jurisdiction to enforce the parties’ settlement agreement did not come to the Court’s attention until some days after it was filed. The Court concludes it has power to act in regards to the parties’ settlement because the motion was filed before the Court's jurisdiction expired. Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of America, 511 U.S. 375 (1994); 4:20 Communications, Inc. v. Paradigm Co., 336 F.3d 775 (8th Cir. 2003). Motion, Doc. 93, granted. The Court retains jurisdiction until 27 March 2023 to enforce the parties’ settlement.

So Ordered.

D.P. Marshall Jr. United States District Judge 3 wch LORS

-2-