Samuel A. Fordjour v. Forties Benefits Insurance Company

57 F.3d 1076 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Samuel A. FORDJOUR, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. FORTIES BENEFITS INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee. No. 94-16484. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted June 6, 1995. * Decided June 8, 1995. Before: O'SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Samuel A. Fordjour appeals pro se the district court's order enforcing a settlement agreement between Fordjour and Fortis Benefits Insurance, Co., ("Fortis") pursuant to which Fordjour's action was dismissed with prejudice. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 , and we affirm. 3 We review for clear error the district court's finding that the parties reached agreement on settlement terms. See Ahern v. Central Pac. Freight Lines, 846 F.2d 47 , 48 (9th Cir.1988) ("the district court's finding that [a party] assented to the settlement and intended to be bound by it must be affirmed unless it is clearly erroneous"). 4 To conserve…