(PC) Brackett v. Anderson

Opinion

Demond Charles Brackett, No. 2:21-cv-02282-KJM-JDP Plaintiff, ORDER v. Wendell Anderson, et al., 1S Defendants. The parties previously stipulated to the dismissal of this action with prejudice after they reached a settlement agreement. See Not. Settlement, ECF No. 88; Stip., ECF No. 89. The court dismissed the action and closed the case without retaining jurisdiction. Min. Order, ECF No. 90. Plaintiff now alleges defendants have violated the settlement agreement. ECF No. 91. The court construes that notice as a motion to enforce the settlement agreement. Absent an independent basis of federal subject matter jurisdiction, the enforcement of the settlement agreement is for the state courts. See Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 381 (1994). The notice at ECF No. 91, construed as a motion to enforce, is therefore denied for lack of jurisdiction. DATED: March 4, 2025. Agile ae . □□□ STATES DISTRICT JUDGE