Hollis v. High Desert State Prison

Filing 132

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 2/10/2012 ORDERING Settlement Conference SET for 3/15/2012 at 01:00 PM in Redding (CMK) before Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison. Defendants' lead counsel and a person with full unlimited au thority to negotiate and enter into a binding settlement on defendants' behalf shall attend in person; failure of any counsel, party or authorized person subject to this order to appear in person may result in imposition of sanctions. (Waggoner, D)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

MARVIN GLENN HOLLIS,

11
12
13
14

Plaintiff,

No. 2:08-cv-2810 GEB KJN P

vs.
HIGH DESERT STATE PRISON,
et al.,
Defendants.

15

ORDER
/

16

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel with an action under 42

17

U.S.C. § 1983. This case has been selected for the court’s Prisoner ADR Program and will be

18

referred to Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison to conduct a settlement conference at the U. S.

19

District Court, 501 I Street, Sacramento, California 95814 in Courtroom #2 on March 15, 2012 at

20

1:00 p.m.

21
22

A separate order and writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum will issue
concurrently with this order.

23

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

24

1. This case is set for settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Craig M.

25

Kellison on March 15, 2012, at 1:00 p.m., at the U.S. District Court, 501 I Street, Sacramento,

26

California 95814, in Courtroom #2.
1

1
2

2. Defendants’ lead counsel and a person with full and unlimited authority to
negotiate and enter into a binding settlement on defendants’ behalf shall attend in person.1

3

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

4

damages. The failure of any counsel, party or authorized person subject to this order to appear in

5

person may result in the imposition of sanctions. In addition, the conference will not proceed

6

and will be reset to another date.

7

DATED: February 10, 2012

8
9

_____________________________________
KENDALL J. NEWMAN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

10
11

holl2810.med

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

1

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.
Pittman 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).
2