The defendant LawPRO brought a motion to enforce a purported settlement under Rule 49.09.
The plaintiffs had offered to dismiss their claim against LawPRO without costs.
LawPRO purported to accept the offer but added a condition requiring all cross-claiming defendants to execute a release.
The court found that this conditional acceptance constituted a counter-offer, which the plaintiffs never accepted.
The plaintiffs subsequently withdrew their original offer.
The court dismissed the motion, finding no binding settlement existed.
