Flournoy v. Sacramento County Sheriff Dept et al

Filing 192

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 03/26/18 ORDERING ( Settlement Conference set for 6/4/2018 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 24 (CKD) before Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney.) Parties are directed to submit confidential settlement st atements no later than May 25,2018 to [e-mail]. Parties are also directed to file a Notice ofSubmission of Confidential Settlement Statement (See L.R. 270(d)). Settlement statements should not be filed with the Clerk of the Court nor served onany other party. Settlement statements shall be clearly marked confidential withthe date and time of the settlement conference indicated prominently thereon. (cc: CKD). (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

JAMES HENRY FLOURNOY,

11
12
13

No. 2:11-cv-2844-KJM-EFB P

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER SETTING SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE

SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF
DEP’T, et al.,

14
Defendants.
15
16
17

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding through counsel with an action under 42 U.S.C.

18

§ 1983. The court has determined that this case will benefit from a settlement conference.

19

Therefore, this case will be referred to Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney to conduct a

20

settlement conference at the U. S. District Court, 501 I Street, Sacramento, California 95814 in

21

Courtroom #24 on June 4, 2018 at 9:30 a.m.

22

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

23

1. This case is set for a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Carolyn K.

24

Delaney on June 4, 2018 at 9:30 a.m. in Courtroom #24 at the U. S. District Court,

25

501 I Street, Sacramento, California 95814.

26
27
28

2. Parties are instructed to have a principal with full settlement authority present at the
Settlement Conference or to be fully authorized to settle the matter on any terms. The
1

1

individual with full authority to settle must also have “unfettered discretion and

2

authority” to change the settlement position of the party, if appropriate. The purpose

3

behind requiring the attendance of a person with full settlement authority is that the

4

parties’ view of the case may be altered during the face to face conference. An

5

authorization to settle for a limited dollar amount or sum certain can be found not to

6

comply with the requirement of full authority to settle1.

7

3. Parties are directed to submit confidential settlement statements no later than May 25,

8

2018 to [e-mail]. Parties are also directed to file a “Notice of

9

Submission of Confidential Settlement Statement” (See L.R. 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 “confidential” with

13

the date and time of the settlement conference indicated prominently thereon.

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
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
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 (9th 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

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

2

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

3

dispute.

4

c. A summary of the proceedings to date.

5

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

6

trial.

7

e. The relief sought.

8

f. The party’s position on settlement, including present demands and offers and a

9
10

history of past settlement discussions, offers, and demands.
g. A brief statement of each party’s expectations and goals for the settlement

11

conference.

12

DATED: March 26, 2018.

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

3