There was a settlement. Period.
As I and others have quoted above, Marty says there was no settlement. If words have any meaning, then there was a settlement regardless of what Marty says.
Marty is, at best, engaging in semantics to the level of redefining words.
As also noted above, in her Request to Lift Stay, Monique states:
* * * * * BEGIN QUOTATION * * * * *
my husband and I have effectively achieved the primary purpose that the lawsuit was originally intended to serve by our own independent efforts.
* * * * * END QUOTATION * * * * *
The only conceivable way in which Monique and her husband, Marty, could have "effectively achieved the primary purpose that the lawsuit was originally intended to serve" -- i.e., the termination of their harassment by the Church of Scientology and its agents -- is by some sort of contract, agreement, understanding, etc., -- i.e. a settlement -- with the Church of Scientology. There is simply no other way to do it.
Think about it. Party A has harassed Party B. Absent an injunction, court order, judgment for damages creating deterrence, or other legal intervention, what is to stop Party A from harassing Party B in the future? Only by some sort of contract, agreement, understanding, settlement, etc.
Marty might think that in this context there is some meaningful distinction (or for an old-hand Scientologist, "differentiation") between a contact, agreement, understanding, etc., on the one hand, and a "settlement," on the other hand, but he would be wrong.
Note, I am not in this comment saying Marty and/or Monique received any money or other compensation. I am simply saying that in order to have "have effectively achieved the primary purpose that the lawsuit was originally intended to serve" they must have reached some sort of agreement with the Church of Scientology -- in other words, a settlement.
Finally, the statement that Monique and Marty "effectively achieved the primary purpose that the lawsuit was originally intended to serve
by [their] own independent efforts" is risible and, indeed, would be insulting to the intelligence of an orangutan. Without Ray Jeffrey they would have been screwed. The efforts of Ray Jeffrey were the only reason they "effectively achieved the primary purpose that the lawsuit was originally intended to serve" (assuming they did so). And in return they threw Ray Jeffrey under the bus.