[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Attorney fees

From: Alexander Terekhov
Subject: Re: Attorney fees
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2008 07:11:08 +0200

John Hasler wrote:
> rjack wrote:
> > the SFLC dimisses its cases immediately after filing
> Something like 97% of lawsuits in the US are settled out of court.


The settlement of the lawsuit defines legal requirements of the parties,
and is often put in force by an order of the court after a joint
stipulation by the parties. In other situations (as where the claims
have been satisfied by the payment of a certain sum of money) the
plaintiff and defendant can simply file a notice that the case has been

The majority of cases are decided by a settlement. Both sides (or the
side with fewer monetary resources) often have a strong incentive to
settle to avoid the costs (such as legal fees, finding expert witnesses,
etc.), associated with a trial, particularly where a trial by jury is
available. Generally, one side or the other will make a settlement offer
early in litigation. The parties may hold (and indeed, the court may
require) a settlement conference, at which they attempt to reach such a

In Verizon case, there was a court requiring *initial* conference and
ordering parties to submit statements regarding party's positions on
jurisdiction, contested and uncontested facts, contested and uncontested
legal issues, settlement prospects, and etc.

SFCL moved to delay all that and dismissed the case (without any
stipulation of settlement) immediately prior to new deadline.

Specific jurisdictions

United States

Generally, when a settlement is reached in the U.S., it will be
submitted to the court to be "rolled into a court order". This is done
so that the court which was initially assigned the case may retain
jurisdiction over it. The court is then free to modify its order as
necessary to achieve justice in the case, and a party that breaches the
settlement may be held in contempt of court, rather than facing only a
civil claim for the breach. In cases where confidentiality is required
by the parties, the court order may refer to another document which is
not disclosed, but which may be revealed to prove a breach of the

The court rolled on order the following

That's not a settlement.


(GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can
be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards
too, whereas GNU cannot.)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]