Opinion ID: 2534320
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 12

Heading: The trial was a legal action to enforce the terms of the Compromise

Text: Ed argues the trial was not a legal action to enforce the terms of the Compromise. The trial was essentially a series of evidentiary hearings on the remaining contested motions, namely, the dispersing agent's motion to pay off the Tess Ucovich note and other expenses and fees; Mike's motion to approve the capital accounts through November 2001 and to charge Ed's account with certain expenses and fees; and Ed's motions regarding Parcel H, the accounting, and various fees and expenses. In its Findings and Conclusions the court concluded that the overriding issues in the case involved enforcing the Compromise, enforcing the court's orders, and approval of the dispersing agent's actions. Ed contends these issues were necessary components of the winding-up process, not aspects of an action to enforce. He offers the definition of enforce, which he says means to compel obedience to. It also means to give force or effect to. BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY 569 (8th ed.2004). Since the trial concerned the dispersing agent's efforts to carry out his court-ordered duties, Mike's efforts to assist the dispersing agent, and Ed's objection to those efforts, it seems the trial could be fairly characterized as a legal action to enforce the terms of the Compromise within the ordinary meaning of those terms. 2.