Burlington Data Processing v. Automated Medical, Civ. A. No. 79-151.

CourtUnited States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. District of Vermont
Writing for the CourtHOLDEN
Citation492 F. Supp. 821
PartiesBURLINGTON DATA PROCESSING, INC. v. AUTOMATED MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC., Clinical Management Systems, Inc., and William Carlson.
Docket NumberCiv. A. No. 79-151.
Decision Date12 June 1980

492 F. Supp. 821

BURLINGTON DATA PROCESSING, INC.
v.
AUTOMATED MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC., Clinical Management Systems, Inc., and William Carlson.

Civ. A. No. 79-151.

United States District Court, D. Vermont.

June 12, 1980.


Alan F. Sylvester, Sylvester & Maley, Burlington, Vt., for plaintiff.

Thomas F. Heilmann, Villa & Heilmann, Burlington, Vt., Paul S. Richter, Batzell, Nunn & Bode, Washington, D. C., for defendant.

492 F. Supp. 822

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

HOLDEN, Chief Judge.

This action was originally filed in the Vermont Chittenden County Superior Court. It was removed to this court on July 26, 1979. The original complaint alleged misappropriation of proprietary information, conversion, unfair competition, breach of a confidential relationship and breach of contract. On February 19, 1980, plaintiff moved to amend the complaint by adding a cause of action alleging fraud, deceit, misrepresentation and breach of contract. The amended complaint alleges that as a result of representations made by defendants, the plaintiff agreed to render null and void a restrictive covenant contained in the original contract between the two parties. The agreement to set aside the restrictive covenant constituted the basis for a consent decree entered on February 15, 1978 in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania in Civil Action 77-4254 which involved the same parties that are before the court at this time. On May 6, 1980 this court denied plaintiff's motion to amend for the reason that it appeared to be an attempt to circumvent the consent decree entered in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. On May 20, 1980 plaintiff moved for reargument and reconsideration of the motion to amend. After further oral and written argument the court again denies plaintiff's motion to amend for the reasons which follow.1

As a general rule, a consent judgment is a judgment on the merits, as is a judgment entered upon a settlement or compromise. Wallace Clark & Co., Inc. v. Acheson Ind., 394 F.Supp. 393 (S.D.N.Y. 1975), aff'd 532 F.2d 846 (2 Cir.), reh. denied 427 U.S. 908, 96 S.Ct. 3194, 49 L.Ed.2d 1200 (1976); Stuyvesant Insurance Co. v. Dean Construction Co., 254 F.Supp. 102 (S.D.N.Y. 1966), aff'd 382 F.2d 991 (2 Cir. 1967). The rationale for the rule has been stated by the Supreme Court:

Consent decrees are entered into by parties to a case after careful negotiation has produced agreement on their precise terms. The parties waive their right to litigate the issues involved in the case and thus save themselves the time,
...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 practice notes
  • Bennett Estate v. Travelers Ins. Co., No. 442-80
    • United States
    • Vermont United States State Supreme Court of Vermont
    • November 3, 1981
    ...setting aside, vacating or enjoining the judgment." Burlington Data Processing, Inc. [140 Vt. 343] v. Automated Medical Systems, Inc., 492 F.Supp. 821, 822 (D.Vt.1980). It is firmly established that judgments that appear to have been regularly obtained are conclusive upon parties and privie......
  • Hixson v. Plump, No. 96-578
    • United States
    • Vermont United States State Supreme Court of Vermont
    • October 24, 1997
    ...Ins. Co., 140 Vt. 339, 342, 438 A.2d 380, 382 (1981) (quoting Burlington Data Processing, Inc. v. Automated Medical Systems, Inc., 492 F.Supp. 821, 822 (D.Vt.1980)). Collateral attack is only appropriate when a party can demonstrate a want in the court's jurisdiction over the subject matter......
  • In re Emmer Bros. Co., Bankruptcy No. 4-82-957
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 8th Circuit. United States District Court of Minnesota
    • July 18, 1985
    ...or contemplates relief other than collateral attack. See also Burlington Data Processing, Inc. v. Automated Medical Systems, Inc., 492 F.Supp. 821, 822 (D.Vt.1980) (collateral attack is "attempt to avoid, defeat, or evade a judicial decree or to deny its force and 5 The decisions cited by t......
  • In re American Basketball League, Inc., Bankruptcy No. 98-60354-MM.
    • United States
    • United States Bankruptcy Courts. Ninth Circuit. U.S. Bankruptcy Court — Northern District of California
    • October 13, 2004
    ...Cir.1998); Meincke v. United States, 14 Cl.Ct. 383, 386 (1988); Burlington Data Processing, Inc. v. Automated Medical Systems, Inc., 492 F.Supp. 821, 822 For example, in Vereda, Ltda. v. United States, 271 F.3d 1367 (Fed.Cir.2001), the federal circuit found that the Federal Court of Claims ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
5 cases
  • Bennett Estate v. Travelers Ins. Co., No. 442-80
    • United States
    • Vermont United States State Supreme Court of Vermont
    • November 3, 1981
    ...setting aside, vacating or enjoining the judgment." Burlington Data Processing, Inc. [140 Vt. 343] v. Automated Medical Systems, Inc., 492 F.Supp. 821, 822 (D.Vt.1980). It is firmly established that judgments that appear to have been regularly obtained are conclusive upon parties and privie......
  • Hixson v. Plump, No. 96-578
    • United States
    • Vermont United States State Supreme Court of Vermont
    • October 24, 1997
    ...Ins. Co., 140 Vt. 339, 342, 438 A.2d 380, 382 (1981) (quoting Burlington Data Processing, Inc. v. Automated Medical Systems, Inc., 492 F.Supp. 821, 822 (D.Vt.1980)). Collateral attack is only appropriate when a party can demonstrate a want in the court's jurisdiction over the subject matter......
  • In re Emmer Bros. Co., Bankruptcy No. 4-82-957
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 8th Circuit. United States District Court of Minnesota
    • July 18, 1985
    ...or contemplates relief other than collateral attack. See also Burlington Data Processing, Inc. v. Automated Medical Systems, Inc., 492 F.Supp. 821, 822 (D.Vt.1980) (collateral attack is "attempt to avoid, defeat, or evade a judicial decree or to deny its force and 5 The decisions cited by t......
  • In re American Basketball League, Inc., Bankruptcy No. 98-60354-MM.
    • United States
    • United States Bankruptcy Courts. Ninth Circuit. U.S. Bankruptcy Court — Northern District of California
    • October 13, 2004
    ...Cir.1998); Meincke v. United States, 14 Cl.Ct. 383, 386 (1988); Burlington Data Processing, Inc. v. Automated Medical Systems, Inc., 492 F.Supp. 821, 822 For example, in Vereda, Ltda. v. United States, 271 F.3d 1367 (Fed.Cir.2001), the federal circuit found that the Federal Court of Claims ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT