Gabrielson et al v. United States Postal Service et al
Filing
44
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 10/27/2011 VACATING the Settlement Conference scheduled for 11/1/2011 as to Pltf. Troy Gabrielson only. (Michel, G)
1
R i v era & A s s o ci a t es
2
2180 H arvard Street, Ste. 310
Sacram ento, C alifornia 95815
3
4
5
6
7
Te l: 9 1 6 -9 2 2 -1 2 0 0 F a x : 9 1 6 9 2 2 -1 3 0 3
J es s e M . R i vera, C S N 84259
J o nat han B. P aul , C S N 215884
S hanan L. Hewi t t , C S N 200168
Kel l y A. Yokl ey, C S N 192015
Attorneys for Plaintiff
TROY GABRIELSON
8
9
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
IN AND FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
TROY GABRIELSON, et al.,
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
vs.
)
)
)
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, et )
al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)
CASE NO. 2:09-CV-00538-MCE-GGH
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO VACATE
THE NOVEMBER 1, 2011 SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE BEFORE MAGISTRATE
JUDGE KENDALL J. NEWMAN AS TO
PLAINTIFF TROY GABRIELSON
18
19
COMES NOW the plaintiff, TROY GABRIELSON, by and through his attorney
20
Jonathan B. Paul, of Rivera & Associates and defendant UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
21
by and through its attorney Jason Ehrlinspiel, of the U.S. Attorney’s Office and subject to the
22
approval of this Court, hereby agree to and respectfully request the vacation of the November 1,
23
2011 settlement conference set before Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman. The undersigned
24
have agreed to purpose vacation of this conference and contend there is good cause for this
25
request for the following reasons:
26
1)
At the invitation of and in response to a prior settlement offer by the United States,
27
Plaintiff Troy Gabrielson presented a settlement demand prior to the rescheduling of the
28
settlement conference in this matter to November 1, 2011. Plaintiff’s 1.5 million dollar
1
2
settlement offer is six times the sum certain listed in his FTCA administrative claim.
2)
That Plaintiff Gabrielson’s demand was rejected by the Untied States. The United States
3
asserts that plaintiff Gabrielson is administratively capped in his recovery pursuant to a
4
Government tort claim filed in this action. The United States also contests liability and
5
plaintiff Gabrielson’s alleged damages.
6
3)
The parties have had further discussions on the topic of presenting their respective
7
positions to the Magistrate Judge at the settlement conference. However, the parties
8
remain steadfast in their respective positions regarding liability, the administrative cap
9
and plaintiff Gabrielson’s alleged damages; hence the parties are diametrically opposed
10
11
on the settlement value of this Mr. Gabrielson’s case.
4)
In light of the foregoing, the parties herein do not believe that continuing forward with
12
the settlement conference as to plaintiff, TROY GABRIELSON would be productive for
13
either the parties nor a sensible expenditure of judicial resources in this case.
14
5)
15
16
Hence, the parties agree that this matter is no longer amenable to settlement conference
as to plaintiff, TROY GABRIELSON’s claims.
6)
The parties herein are in no way indicating that the November 1, 2011 settlement
17
conference should not continue as to Plaintiff, ALLAN BOWEN.
18
RIVERA & ASSOCIATES
19
DATED: October 27, 2011
20
/s/ Jonathan B. Paul
JONATHAN B. PAUL
Attorney for Plaintiff Troy Gabrielson
21
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY’S OFFICE
22
DATED: October 27, 2011
23
24
25
///
26
///
27
///
28
///
/s/ Jason Ehrlinspiel (auth’d on October 27, 2011 )
Jason Ehrlinspiel, Assistant U.S. Attorney
Attorney for Defendant United States
Postal Service
1
FOR GOOD CAUSE SHOWN as stated in the above set forth reasons,
2
IT IS SO ORDERED that the settlement conference scheduled for November 1, 2011 is
3
vacated as to Plaintiff TROY GABRIELSON, only.
4
DATED: October 27, 2011
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
_____________________________________
KENDALL J. NEWMAN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?