King v. Villegas et al

Filing 37

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 9/18/2018 setting Settlement Conference for 1/17/2019 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 8 (BAM) before Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe. (Lundstrom, T)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

JERRY LEE KING,

11
12
13
14

Case No. 1:17-cv-00676-AWI-EPG (PC)

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER SETTING SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE

R. VILLEGAS and P. CRUZ,
Defendants.

15
16

Jerry King (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this

17

civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Court has determined that this case

18

will benefit from a settlement conference. Therefore, this case will be referred to Magistrate

19

Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe to conduct a settlement conference at the U. S. District Court, 2500

20

Tulare Street, Fresno, California, 93721, in Courtroom #8, on January 17, 2019, at 9:30 a.m.

21

The Court will issue the necessary transportation order in due course.

22

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

23

1. A settlement conference is set for January 17, 2019, at 9:30 a.m., in Courtroom #8,

24

before Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe at the U. S. District Court, 2500 Tulare

25

Street, Fresno, California, 93721.

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
2

3. Those in attendance must be prepared to discuss the claims, defenses, and damages at

3

issue in this case. The failure of any counsel, party, or authorized person subject to

4

this order to appear in person may result in the imposition of sanctions. In addition,

5

the conference will not proceed and will be reset to another date.

6

4. Each party shall provide a confidential settlement statement to the following email

7

address: [e-mail]. Plaintiff shall mail his confidential

8

settlement statement to U.S. District Court, 2500 Tulare Street, Fresno, California,

9

93721, Attn: Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe. The envelope shall be marked

10

“Confidential Settlement Statement.” Settlement statements shall arrive no later than

11

January 10, 2019. Parties shall also file a Notice of Submission of Confidential

12

Settlement Conference Statement (see Local Rule 270(d)). Settlement statements

13

should not be filed with the Clerk of the Court nor served on any other party.

14

Settlement statements shall be clearly marked “confidential” with the date and time of

15

the settlement conference indicated prominently thereon.

16

5. The confidential settlement statement shall be no longer than five pages in length,

17

typed or neatly printed, and include the following:

18

a. A brief statement of the facts of the case.

19

b. A brief statement of the claims and defenses, i.e., statutory or other grounds upon

20

which the claims are founded; a forthright evaluation of the parties’ likelihood of

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

prevailing on the claims and defenses; and a description of the major issues in

2

dispute.
c. An estimate of the cost and time to be expended for further discovery, pretrial, and

3

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 the party’s expectations and goals for the settlement

7
8

conference, including how much the party is willing to accept and/or willing to

9

pay.
f. If the parties intend to discuss the joint settlement of any other actions or claims

10
11

not in this suit, give a brief description of each action or claim as set forth above,

12

including case number(s) if applicable.

13
14
15
16

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

September 18, 2018

/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

3