Opinion ID: 2794247
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: facts

Text: In 1999, Plaintiff Gill, a Florida prisoner, brought a § 1983 action against six state prison officials, alleging, inter alia, claims of excessive force. After the district court denied the Defendants’ motion for summary judgment on Gill’s excessive force claims, Gill retained counsel. Shortly before trial, the parties entered into settlement negotiations and reached a verbal agreement to settle. On June 2, 2004, the Defendants’ counsel advised the district court that the parties had settled the case, and the district court entered an order dismissing Gill’s action. The district court retained jurisdiction for sixty days—until August 1, 2004—to amend, vacate or set aside the dismissal order if the settlement was not consummated. Over the course of the next two months, the attorneys for the parties disagreed about the precise terms of the settlement agreement. On July 21, 2004, Gill’s attorney advised the Defendants’ attorney that he had “no choice but to seek judicial intervention.” However, Gill did not do so before the August 1, 2004 deadline. 2 Case: 14-12303 Date Filed: 04/16/2015 Page: 3 of 8 Instead, Gill waited until September 7, 2004 to file a petition to enforce the settlement agreement, advising the district court that the parties were unable to execute a formal settlement agreement. In response, the Defendants quoted at length from the district court’s dismissal order and argued that because the motion was not filed within the required sixty-day period, the district court lacked jurisdiction to enforce the settlement. On September 30, 2004, the district court denied Gill’s petition because the deadline for reinstating Gill’s case had expired, and the district court no longer had jurisdiction to provide the relief Gill sought. Gill did not file a Rule 60(b) motion at that time or appeal the district court’s 2004 order. 1 Over eight years later, on June 28, 2012, Gill filed a Motion for Relief from Order of Dismissal. On July 6, 2012, the district court entered an order returning Gill’s motion and explaining that Gill’s case had been “closed on June 2, 2004 upon entry of a final judgment.” Gill did not appeal the district court’s 2012 order. About two years later, on May 1, 2014, Gill filed another Motion for Relief from Order of Dismissal. On May 6, 2014, the district court entered an order again 1 According to Gill’s appeal brief, Gill filed a 2006 action to enforce the settlement in Florida state court, which was dismissed. In addition, Gill filed a 2008 action in federal district court against the attorneys in the Florida Attorney General’s office who negotiated the settlement on behalf of the Defendants, alleging that the attorneys tortiously interfered with the settlement contract. The district court dismissed Gill’s 2008 action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See Gill v. McCollum, 4:08-cv-376, 2008 WL 4540275 (N.D. Fla. Oct. 9, 2008). This Court affirmed. See Gill v. McCollum, 361 F. App’x 69 (11th Cir. 2010). 3 Case: 14-12303 Date Filed: 04/16/2015 Page: 4 of 8 returning Gill’s motion and explaining that Gill’s case was closed. Gill filed this appeal of the district court’s May 6, 2014 order.