The defendants brought a motion under Rule 49.09 to enforce a settlement agreement allegedly reached via correspondence between counsel.
The plaintiff argued that while it agreed to dismiss the action, it never agreed to discharge the mortgages on the commercial properties it had sold to the defendants.
The court found that, viewed objectively, the plaintiff's offer to dismiss the action reasonably included giving up its mortgage remedies, and the defendants' acceptance created a binding contract.
The court exercised its discretion to enforce the settlement, noting that allowing the litigation to continue would prejudice the defendants due to significant delay and lost evidence.
The action and counterclaim were dismissed, and the mortgages ordered discharged.
