The moving defendants sought judgment enforcing an alleged oral settlement reached during a pre‑trial conference.
The responding plaintiffs disputed that a binding settlement had been made and argued that communications from the pre‑trial could not be relied upon due to settlement privilege and Rule 50.09 of the Rules of Civil Procedure.
The court held that communications made during settlement discussions, including those occurring at a pre‑trial conference, may be admitted where necessary to prove the existence or terms of a settlement agreement.
Based on uncontradicted affidavit evidence from counsel, the court found that the plaintiffs made an offer to dismiss the action against the moving defendants without costs and that the offer was accepted.
The court concluded a valid settlement existed and exercised its discretion to enforce it.