Crayton v. Hedgpeth et al

Filing 290

ORDER re Settlement, signed by District Judge William Haskell Alsup on 5/9/14. (Verduzco, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
TIMOTHY CRAYTON,

12
13
14

v.
CORRECTIONAL OFFICER
A. HEDGEPETH, et al.,

ORDER RE SETTLEMENT

Defendants.
/

15
16

No. C 08-00621 WHA

Plaintiff,

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

Plaintiff Timothy Crayton is represented by pro bono counsel (Dkt. No. 262). This

17

action settled in January 2014. The settlement was signed by Timothy Crayton, counsel for

18

defendants, and the prison warden. The agreement stated:

19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Upon receipt of the settlement amount from
[California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation],
Plaintiff shall execute and file a stipulation of voluntary dismissal
with prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
41(a)(1)(A)(ii). Plaintiff agrees to dismiss all the claims in the
Complaint with prejudice, including Plaintiff’s claims that were
previously dismissed from this matter without prejudice. Plaintiff
further agrees not to appeal any Orders issued in this matter.
(Dkt. No. 283) (emphasis added).
In April 2014, Timothy Crayton, on his own, filed a “motion for sanctions and strict

26

compliance with settlement contract.” Timothy Crayton stated that he refused to sign the

27

stipulated dismissal before defendants delivered him the settlement check. His counsel and

28

defense counsel have filed declarations. Defense counsel stated that the California Department
of Corrections and Rehabilitation would issue Timothy Crayton’s settlement check (Seals

1

Decl. ¶ 5). The time for filing replies has passed.

2

This order rules as follows:

3

1.

By JUNE 3, 2014, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

4

shall provide Timothy Crayton with the settlement check pursuant to the settlement agreement.

5

Within TWO CALENDAR DAYS of doing so, defendants shall so advise the Court with a

6

declaration.

7

2.

The Court will then dismiss with prejudice all claims in the complaint.

8

This will dispose of the entire case, including all claims set forth in the complaint and referred to

9

by plaintiff himself in any of his descriptions of the case. This will terminate the entire action.

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

The file will be closed.
3.

The excellent work of Attorneys Jeffrey L. Bornstein and Claudia A. Quiroz are

12

hereby recognized. When they were appointed as pro bono counsel, the undersigned judge

13

contemplated service only for this proceeding at the district court. It remains their decision

14

whether to represent plaintiff in any future proceedings. The Court thanks them for their service.

15
16

IT IS SO ORDERED.

17
18

Dated: May 9, 2014.

WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2