Opinion ID: 792706
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Settlement Conference

Text: 5 District Court Judge Covello referred Omega Engineering's complaint to Magistrate Judge Thomas P. Smith for settlement discussions. The magistrate judge directed the parties to attend a settlement conference on May 19, 2003, one day before trial was scheduled to begin before the district court. The magistrate judge directed each party to be represented by counsel and that an appropriate representative of the party with authority to settle be present. The parties met in Magistrate Judge Smith's chambers on that day. Omega Engineering was represented by its corporate president, Betty Hollander, and OSA was represented by Neal Gordon, general counsel of the Swatch Group, an OSA affiliate of the Swiss company in the United States. The negotiations concluded during that afternoon, at which time a written settlement had been reached (Settlement Agreement). The parties informed the magistrate judge that the case was settled. 6 The parties together with the magistrate judge went before Judge Covello to report the settlement. Magistrate Judge Smith informed Judge Covello 7 It's my understanding that the case has been settled, and that all of the terms and conditions have been agreed upon by the parties through counsel, and that this agreement has been reduced to writing. And, it's been represented to me by counsel who are present that the document which contains all of the terms and conditions will be signed by the appropriate individual, located in Switzerland. 8 Omega Engineering's counsel confirmed that the case was indeed settled, but stated that it was his understanding that defendant needed two weeks to get the agreement signed and get it on file. Counsel for Omega Engineering stated further that the parties have reached an agreement, [and] it has been reduced to writing. Judge Covello asked OSA's counsel whether this was correct and whether counsel was in control of this situation as far as being able to note this matter as closed, to which OSA's counsel replied Yes. The district court then postponed the trial that had been slated to begin the next day.