A non-party jewelry business sought to enforce an alleged settlement agreement with a bank arising from a fraud claim.
The bank alleged that funds from a fraudulent transaction were deposited into the jewelry business's account.
The jewelry business claimed it had reached a binding settlement agreement to pay the outstanding balance in exchange for a comprehensive release.
The court found that while the parties were engaged in settlement negotiations, they did not reach agreement on all essential terms, particularly regarding payment security covenants and a "no claims over" provision that would have precluded the bank from pursuing its primary defendant.
The motion to enforce the settlement was dismissed, and costs were awarded to the bank.
