Ismael Valdivia, et al. v. Old Dominion Freight Line, Inc., et al.; Old Dominion Freight Line, Inc. v. IVS Express, Inc., et al.

Summary

The court denied Ismael Valdivia’s motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) to reconsider its prior order enforcing a settlement. The court held that Valdivia’s arguments concerning his communications with counsel and his receipt of a written global release had already been considered and did not negate his counsel’s prior authority to settle. The court also denied as moot Valdivia’s motion to stay.

Holdings

1. Reconsideration was not warranted because Valdivia identified neither an intervening change in controlling law nor newly available evidence, and he failed to show clear error of law or fact or manifest injustice.
2. They did not. Valdivia's attempts to contact Godshall on September 5 did not constitute rejection of the settlement because Valdivia did not yet know that the case had settled, and his later rejection did not negate his prior authorization to settle.
3. The later preparation and delivery of the written release did not negate the settlement or require reconsideration because the settlement became binding when the parties orally agreed to its terms, notwithstanding a later change of heart or reduction of the terms to writing.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Valdivia established an intervening change in controlling law, newly available evidence, clear error, or manifest injustice warranting reconsideration under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e).
2. Whether Valdivia's attempts to contact counsel on September 5 and his later rejection of the settlement negated his prior authorization for counsel to settle.
3. Whether the fact that the written global release was prepared and provided after the oral settlement agreement required reconsideration of the order enforcing the settlement.

Disposition

other