What is the test for determining if a settlement agreement was signed in open court?

In a statutory settlement proceeding, we review the trial court's determination of factual matters for substantial evidence, including the trial court's determination that the parties entered into a binding settlement agreement in open court. To the extent we engage in the proper interpretation of section 664.6, including the determination whether the statutory requirements were met, we exercise our independent review. (Gauss v. GAF Corp. (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 1110, 1116.)

1. The trial court had jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement.

Section 664.6 provides: "If parties to pending litigation stipulate, in a writing signed by the parties outside the presence of the court or orally before the court, for settlement of the case, or part thereof, the court, upon motion, may enter judgment pursuant to the terms of the settlement. If requested by the parties, the court may retain jurisdiction over the parties to enforce the settlement until performance in full of the terms of the settlement." Here, the parties were present in court when the bank's lawyer recited the terms of their agreement on the record. Each party stated his or her agreement with the terms of the settlement orally on the record before the court, including the term asking the court to retain jurisdiction to enforce their settlement agreement. (Fiege v. Cooke (2004) 125 Cal.App.4th 1350, 1353-1356 [parties and counsel discussed settlement with court before going on the record with counsel relating settlement terms; "[n]o more was necessary"].)