Lear v. Biter et al

Filing 85

ORDER Setting Settlement Conference, signed by Magistrate Judge Jeremy D. Peterson on 4/2/19. ( Settlement Conference set for 7/9/2019 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 10 (EPG) before Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean.) (Marrujo, C)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 RODERICK WILLIAM LEAR, 11 12 13 Case No. 1:15-cv-01903-DAD-JDP (PC) Plaintiff, v. ORDER SETTING SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE JOHNATHAN AKANNO and JENNIFER PALOMINO, 14 Defendants. 15 16 Plaintiff Roderick William Lear, a state prisoner, is proceeding with counsel appointed for 17 the limited purpose of settlement, in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The 18 Court has determined that this case will benefit from a settlement conference. Therefore, this 19 case will be referred to Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean to conduct a settlement conference at 20 the U. S. District Court, 2500 Tulare Street, Fresno, California 93721 in Courtroom #10 on July 21 9, 2019 at 10:00 a.m. The court will issue the necessary transportation order in due course. 22 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 23 1. This case is set for a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean 24 on July 9, 2019, at 10:00 a.m. at the U. S. District Court, 2500 Tulare Street, Fresno, 25 California 93721 in Courtroom #10. 26 2. A representative with full and unlimited authority to negotiate and enter into a binding 27 28 1 settlement shall attend in person.1 1 3. Those in attendance must be prepared to discuss the claims, defenses and damages. 2 3 The failure of any counsel, party or authorized person subject to this order to appear in 4 person may result in the imposition of sanctions. In addition, the conference will not 5 proceed and will be reset to another date. 6 4. Each party shall provide a confidential settlement statement to the following email 7 address: epgorders@caed.uscourts.gov. Settlement statements shall arrive no later 8 than July 2, 2019. Parties shall also file a Notice of Submission of Confidential 9 Settlement Statement (See Local Rule 270(d)). 10 11 Settlement statements should not be filed with the Clerk of the Court nor served on 12 any other party. Settlement statements shall be clearly marked Aconfidential@ with 13 the date and time of the settlement conference clearly noted on the first page. 14 15 The confidential settlement statement shall be no longer than five pages in length, 16 typed or neatly printed, and include the following: 17 a. A brief statement of the facts of the case. 18 b. A brief statement of the claims and defenses, i.e., statutory or other grounds 19 upon which the claims are founded; a forthright evaluation of the parties= 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 While the exercise of its authority is subject to abuse of discretion review, “the district court has the authority to order parties, including the federal government, to participate in mandatory settlement conferences… .” United States v. United States District Court for the Northern Mariana Islands, 694 F.3d 1051, 1053, 1057, 1059 (9 th Cir. 2012)(“the district court has broad authority to compel participation in mandatory settlement conference[s].”). The term “full authority to settle” means that the individuals attending the mediation conference must be authorized to fully explore settlement options and to agree at that time to any settlement terms acceptable to the parties. G. Heileman Brewing Co., Inc. v. Joseph Oat Corp., 871 F.2d 648, 653 (7th Cir. 1989), cited with approval in Official Airline Guides, Inc. v. Goss, 6 F.3d 1385, 1396 (9th Cir. 1993). The individual with full authority to settle must also have “unfettered discretion and authority” to change the settlement position of the party, if appropriate. Pitman v. Brinker Int’l., Inc., 216 F.R.D. 481, 485-86 (D. Ariz. 2003), amended on recon. in part, Pitman v. Brinker Int’l., Inc., 2003 WL 23353478 (D. Ariz. 2003). The purpose behind requiring the attendance of a person with full settlement authority is that the parties’ view of the case may be altered during the face to face conference. Pitman, 216 F.R.D. at 486. An authorization to settle for a limited dollar amount or sum certain can be found not to comply with the requirement of full authority to settle. Nick v. Morgan’s Foods, Inc., 270 F.3d 590, 596-97 (8th Cir. 2001). 1 2 1 likelihood of prevailing on the claims and defenses; and a description of the 2 major issues in dispute. c. An estimate of the cost and time to be expended for further discovery, pretrial, 3 and trial. 4 d. The party=s position on settlement, including present demands and offers and a 5 history of past settlement discussions, offers, and demands. 6 e. A brief statement of each party’s expectations and goals for the settlement conference, 7 including how much a party is willing to accept and/or willing to pay. 8 f. If the parties intend to discuss the joint settlement of any other actions or claims not in 9 10 this suit, give a brief description of each action or claim as set forth above, including 11 case number(s) if applicable. 12 13 14 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: April 2, 2019 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?