The plaintiffs brought a motion to enforce an alleged settlement arising from an oral agreement reached during a break in litigation proceedings.
The dispute concerned whether the settlement permitted the purchase of the defendant’s shares through a corporate share redemption rather than a purchase by the individual plaintiffs.
The court held that it had jurisdiction to determine the issue and converted the motion into a summary judgment motion.
After reviewing the surrounding circumstances and draft settlement documents, the court concluded that the parties intended the personal plaintiffs to purchase the shares.
The court declared that a binding settlement existed and ordered enforcement consistent with that interpretation.
