Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance Co.
United States Supreme Court
511 U.S. 375 (1994)
- Written by Jody Stuart, JD
Facts
Guardian Life Insurance Co. (Guardian) (defendant) terminated Matt Kokkonen’s general agency agreement. Kokkonen sued Guardian in state trial court, alleging various state-law claims. Guardian removed the case to federal district court on the basis of diversity jurisdiction and filed state-law counterclaims. Before the end of the trial, the parties arrived at an agreement settling all claims and counterclaims. The parties recited the substance of the settlement agreement, on the record, before the district judge. The district judge entered an order of dismissal, dismissing the complaint and cross-complaint. The order did not reserve jurisdiction in the district court to enforce the settlement agreement, nor did it refer to the settlement agreement at all. Subsequently, the parties disagreed on Kokkonen’s obligation to return certain files to Guardian under the settlement agreement. Guardian moved in the district court to enforce the settlement agreement, which Kokkonen opposed, asserting that the district court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction. The district court entered an enforcement order, asserting an inherent power to do so, and Kokkonen appealed. The appeals court also referred to inherent power and affirmed the trial court’s decision.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Scalia, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
