Ilsung v. Mobert

Filing 81

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 07/21/15 ordering that plaintiff's 07/08/15 letter is filed in the above case and disregarded. (Plummer, M)(cc: KJN) Modified on 7/21/2015 (Plummer, M).

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

VICTORY ILSUNG,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 1:10-CV-2070 AWI MJS

v.

ORDER

ROBERT MOBERT,

15

Defendant.

16
Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se. On June 5, 2015, the undersigned held a

17
18

settlement conference, during which the parties reached a settlement. The court read the terms of

19

the settlement for the record to which the parties agreed. On July 9, 2015, the case was dismissed

20

with prejudice in light of the parties’ June 5, 2015 stipulation for voluntary dismissal (ECF No.

21

79).

22

On July 8, 2015, plaintiff wrote a letter to the undersigned, complaining that in addition to

23

an amount due for restitution from 1995, he has since become aware of a judgment for overdue

24

child support that he believes will be paid from the settlement amount. Plaintiff contends that had

25

he known about the judgment for child support, which he believes was entered in error, he would

26

not have entered into the settlement herein.

27

The undersigned has reviewed the terms of the settlement placed on the court record. At

28

the time the parties agreed to the settlement terms in open court, the undersigned confirmed that
1

1

the actual amount of the restitution would have no impact on the enforceability of the settlement

2

as agreed. In other words, the parties were cautioned that an increase or decrease in the amount

3

owed for restitution would have no impact on the settlement of this case. Similarly, plaintiff’s

4

obligation to pay a child support judgment is not relevant to the settlement reached on June 5,

5

2015. Plaintiff may wish to contact an attorney or someone else to challenge entry of the

6

judgment for child support if he believes it was entered in error.

7

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s July 8, 2015 letter is filed in the

8

above case and disregarded.

9

Dated: July 21, 2015

10
11
12
/ilsu2070.setenf

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2