Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss entered into a settlement with Facebook over their allegations against Mark Zuckerberg, the founder of Facebook. They alleged that they had hired Zuckerberg, their classmate at Harvard University, to work on their social networking site, ConnectU, but instead, he stole their idea and launched his own site. The dispute was settled for $20 million cash and $45 million in Facebook shares. Three years later, the Winklevoss twins attempted to have the settlement overturned on the basis that they had been misled during negotiations about the value of the shares they would receive as part of the settlement. They lost their attempt at both the U.S. Circuit Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals. The result illustrates that courts are generally very reluctant to reopen settlements. Why are courts reluctant to reopen settlements? What steps can be taken to reduce the possibility of litigation after a settlement?