Settlement is often the best resolution of a lawsuit—it limits the stress and uncertainty surrounding litigation and allows the parties to move past a dispute. But what happens if your opposing party fails to meet its obligations under the settlement agreement? Often, the only remedy is to sue them again.
On August 3, 2022 the honorable Judge Richard Mott granted summary judgment in favor of two MCVP clients who had settled litigation based on the written commitment of their opposing parties to grant land to the plaintiffs through a lot line revision. After settlement, however, the opposing parties refused to meet their obligations, and MCVP was forced bring a lawsuit on our clients’ behalf. Judge Mott granted MCVP’s motion for summary judgment, finding that the settlement was “unambiguous as to its requirement that the Defendants’ cooperate in obtaining the agreed Lot Line Revision, the parameters of which are undisputed.” The Defendants were ordered to sign the lot line revision and to pay the Firm’s attorneys’ fees and costs. Attorneys’ fees were awarded only because the original settlement agreement negotiated by MCVP obligated a breaching party to pay.
Partner Dean McGee and senior associate Jennifer Clark drafted the winning motion. Partner Christopher Coleman represented the clients in the underlying litigation.