Johnson v. M&D Kapoor Enterprise LLC
- Susan Van Keulen
- 5:21-cv-03901
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Johnson v. M&D Kapoor Enterprise LLC, Judge Van Keulen ordered briefing and a hearing on whether the court still had jurisdiction after dismissal.
Scott Johnson and M&D Kapoor Enterprise LLC, because the court required briefing and a hearing concerning its continuing authority to address enforcement of their settlement.
What happened
In Johnson v. M&D Kapoor Enterprise LLC, Scott Johnson had voluntarily dismissed the case with prejudice after the parties announced a settlement. Johnson later asked the court to enter the agreed judgment, saying the defendant had failed to make required settlement payments.
M&D Kapoor Enterprise LLC opposed the request, saying Johnson had not provided notice of the alleged default and had offered to make any outstanding payments, which Johnson disputed. The opinion does not resolve whether the defendant defaulted or whether the settlement payments were owed.
Judge Susan Van Keulen ordered Johnson to explain in writing whether the court still had authority to decide the dispute after the case was dismissed. The court also ordered the parties to appear for a hearing on November 22, 2022. It did not decide whether it had continuing jurisdiction.
The detailed version
- Johnson v. M&D Kapoor Enterprise LLC · No. 5:21-cv-03901
- Susan Van Keulen
- Nov. 3, 2022
Background
Scott Johnson voluntarily dismissed this action with prejudice on August 25, 2021, after the parties gave notice of a settlement. On October 19, 2022, Johnson filed an ex parte application asking the court to enter the stipulated judgment that the parties had agreed to as part of their settlement. Johnson asserted that M&D Kapoor Enterprise LLC had defaulted on its settlement obligations.
Parties’ Positions
M&D Kapoor opposed Johnson’s application. It stated that Johnson had not given notice of the alleged default and that it had offered to make any outstanding payments, but Johnson declined that offer. Johnson filed a supporting declaration disputing M&D Kapoor’s claim that it had offered to cure the default.
Court’s Action
Because Johnson had already dismissed the action with prejudice, the court ordered him to show cause in writing by November 15, 2022, why the court continued to have subject-matter jurisdiction—the legal authority to hear the dispute—in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of America. The court ordered the parties to appear at a hearing on November 22, 2022, at 11:00 a.m. This order did not decide whether the court had jurisdiction, whether M&D Kapoor had defaulted, or whether the stipulated judgment should be entered.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.