花都影视

Infinity Security Solutions, LLC v. Karam Properties I, Ltd., 6th Dist. No. L-12-1313, 2013-Ohio-4415. The Sixth District found that a trial court did not have jurisdiction to enforce a settlement agreement when the dismissal entry failed to be conditioned upon the settlement agreement or did not expressly reserve the trial court's jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement. The parties reached a settlement in a $13 million liability matter related to an apartment fire. The settlement, however, was never reduced to writing and no record was made of the settlement proceedings in open court. After the trial court entered a sua sponte judgment dismissing the action and one party moved for the trial court to enforce the dismissal, the trial court determined the judgment was a conditional dismissal and that it retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement. The appellate court, however, reversed because the dismissal entry was neither conditioned upon the settlement agreement nor expressly reserved the trial court's jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement. Because the dismissal entry failed to do either, the appellate court ruled it was an unconditional dismissal and that the trial court had no jurisdiction to enforce the settlement.