Case 5:15-cv-00403-HE Document 114 Filed 11/20/20 Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

LEONE MEYER, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
vs. ) NO. CIV-15-0403-HE
)
THE BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE )
UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHQMA, et al. )
)
Defendants. )

ORDER

Defendants have moved for an order compelling plaintiff to comply with the

Settlement Agreement previously entered into between the parties. A hearing was held

this date on defendants' motion. For the reasons stated more fully from the bench at the

conclusion of the hearing, the court finds and concludes as follows:

1. The parties previously entered into a Settlement Agreement as to the matters at

issue in this case, addressing rights to an oil painting titled "La Bergere rentrant des

moutons" (Shepherdess Bringing in Sheep) by Camille Pissarro (the "Painting") (see Doc.

#99-1);

2. Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement and the joint motion of the parties, the

court dismissed plaintiffs claims and the case, but explicitly retained jurisdiction ''to

enforce the Settlement Agreement and any disputes arising out of it." [Doc. Nos. 100 &

101];

3. Plaintiff has now commenced litigation in the District Court of Paris, Republic

of France, seeking to sequester the Painting and prevent its return to the United States
 Case 5:15-cv-00403-HE Document 114 Filed 11/20/20 Page 2 of 3

pursuant to the Settlement Agreement's provisions for perpetual rotation of the Painting

between entities in France and in the United States;

4. Plaintiffs commencement of litigation is a violation of the Settlement

Agreement, particularly paragraph 8 thereof, which, among other things, requires each

party to "refrain and forbear forever from . . . commencing . . . any lawsuit, action or

proceeding against the other Parties ... based upon any of the matters released in

Paragraphs 8.a and 8.b." Paragraph 8.a releases all claims ofMs. Meyer against defendants

"including without limitation, any matter pertaining to the Painting."

5. The issuance of an order compelling compliance with the Settlement Agreement

is not contrary to principles of international comity and concern for the prerogatives of the

courts of other sovereign nations. Plaintiff resorted to the courts of the United States in the

first instance, reached an agreed disposition of her claims in the context of a U. S. judicial

proceeding, and explicitly agreed that this court was the appropriate court for enforcement

of rights under the Settlement Agreement.

6. The issuance of an order compelling compliance with the Settlement Agreement

is not unfair or unreasonable as to plaintiff. The Settlement Agreement was negotiated at

arm's length, with each party represented by competent and independent counsel of their

own choosing. The Settlement Agreement was approved at the time both by this court and,

as contemplated by the Settlement Agreement, the District Court of Paris, Republic of

France, which found the Settlement Agreement to be valid and "enforceable on French

territory ...."[Doc.# 102-1, pp. 55-57].

2
 Case 5:15-cv-00403-HE Document 114 Filed 11/20/20 Page 3 of 3

For these reasons, the court concludes defendants' motion to enforce the Settlement

Agreement [Doc. #102] should be and is GRANTED. Plaintiff LEONE MEYER is

ORDERED to dismiss, and to cease and forbear from any further pursuit of, those legal

proceedings instituted by her in the District Court of Paris, Republic of France, related to

the Painting.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated this 20th day of November, 2020.