Martinez v. County of Tulare et al

Filing 24

ORDER Entering Judgment in Favor of Plaintiff Maria Eva Martinez and Against Defendant County of Tulare signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 1/17/2017. CASE CLOSED. (Jessen, A)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MARIA EVA MARTINEZ, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 15 v. TULARE COUNTY, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, and DOES 1-100, Defendants. 16 No. 1:16-cv-01140-DAD-SKO ORDER ENTERING JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF MARIA EVA MARTINEZ AND AGAINST DEFENDANT COUNTY OF TULARE (Doc. No. 23) 17 In a notice dated January 4, 2017, plaintiff Maria Eva Martinez accepted defendant 18 County Tulare’s offer of judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68(a). (Doc. No. 19 23.) Plaintiff attached as an exhibit to this notice defendant County of Tulare’s offer of judgment 20 to resolve any liability claimed in the action by obligating the County of Tulare to pay plaintiff 21 $50,000, which includes all costs of suit and attorneys’ fees, and to provide specified non- 22 monetary relief. (Doc. No. 23 at 3–5.) The offer of judgment was dated December 21, 2016. (Id. 23 at 5) On January 9, 2017, plaintiff filed the offer and notice of acceptance as well as a proof of 24 service. (Doc. Nos. 23 and 23-1.) Trial is currently scheduled for September 19, 2017. (Doc. 25 No. 21.) 26 27 28 Rule 68(a) states, in relevant part: At least 14 days before the date set for trial, a party defending against a claim may serve on an opposing party an offer to allow judgment on specified terms, with the costs then accrued. If, within 1 1 14 days after being served, the opposing party serves written notice accepting the offer, either party may then file the offer and notice of acceptance, plus proof of service. The clerk must then enter judgment. 2 3 4 It is widely accepted that “[t]he [Rule 68] offer, once made, is non-negotiable; it is either 5 accepted, in which case it is automatically entered by the clerk of court, or rejected, in which case 6 it stands as the marker by which the plaintiff’s results are ultimately measured.” Beauchamp v. 7 Anaheim Union High School District, 816 F.3d 1216, 1223 (9th Cir. 2016) (quoting Nusom v. 8 Comh Woodburn, Inc., 122 F.3d 830, 834 (9th Cir. 1997)). 9 In this matter the Rule 68 offer was made at least fourteen days before the trial date and 10 was accepted within fourteen days after being made and served. Thereafter, plaintiff has since 11 filed the offer and notice of acceptance as well as a proof of service with the court. Accordingly, 12 because the procedural requirements of Rule 68 have been met: 13 1) The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment in favor of plaintiff Maria Eva 14 Martinez and against defendant County of Tulare according to the terms of the offer and 15 notice (Doc. No. 23); 16 2) All future dates and hearings in the matter are hereby vacated; and 17 3) The Clerk of the Court is directed to close the case. 18 19 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: January 17, 2017 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?