Settlement and Compromise

Challenging Settlement Agreements Via 'Retention of Jurisdiction' Provisions

, New York Law Journal

   | 0 Comments

Settlement and Compromise columnist Thomas E.L. Dewey writes that a recent holding in the 'Patton Boggs v. Chevron' case demonstrates that "retention of jurisdiction" provisions in stipulations of dismissal can lead to litigation with non-parties over underlying settlement agreements. At the same time, it signals to would-be intervenors in such cases that they must show not only that they have legally protected interests in the settlement agreements, but also that there are proceedings in the dismissed actions in which they seek to intervene.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at customercare@alm.com

What's being said

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202777874293

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.