Harrison v. Linde, et. al.

Filing 101

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 5/1/2015 SETTING a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 5/22/2015 at 1:30 p.m. at Kern Valley State Prison; and the Clerk shall serve a copy of this order on the ligation office at KVSP via fax. (cc:JLT, ADR)(Yin, K)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CARL F. HARRISON, 12 13 14 No. 2:12-cv-2000 KJM CKD P Plaintiff, v. ORDER SETTING SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE D. DeBOARD, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights 18 action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On March 31, 2015, the parties were ordered to 19 submit confidential statements indicating whether parties believed this case would benefit from a 20 settlement conference. (ECF No. 98.) After a review of parties’ statements, the Court has 21 determined that this case will benefit from a settlement conference. Therefore, this case will be 22 referred to Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston to conduct a settlement conference at Kern 23 Valley State Prison (KVSP), 3000 West Cecil Avenue, Delano, California 93216 on May 22, 24 2015 at 1:30 p.m. 25 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 26 1. This case is set for a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. 27 28 Thurston on May 22, 2015 at 1:30 p.m. at Kern Valley State Prison (KVSP), 3000 1 West Cecil Avenue, Delano, California 93216. 1 2. A representative with full and unlimited authority to negotiate and enter into a binding 2 settlement shall attend in person.1 3 3. Those in attendance must be prepared to discuss the claims, defenses and damages. 4 5 The failure of any counsel, party or authorized person subject to this order to appear in 6 person may result in the imposition of sanctions. In addition, the conference will not 7 proceed and will be reset to another date. 8 4. Plaintiff SHALL immediately upon receipt of this order submit to defendant, by mail, 9 a written itemization of damages and a meaningful settlement demand, which includes 10 a brief explanation of why such a settlement is appropriate, not to exceed ten pages in 11 length. Thereafter, no later than 10 days before the settlement conference, defendant 12 SHALL respond, by telephone or in person, with an acceptance of the offer or with a 13 meaningful counteroffer, which includes a brief explanation of why such a settlement 14 is appropriate. If settlement is achieved, defense counsel is to immediately inform the 15 courtroom deputy of Magistrate Judge Thurston. 5. If settlement is not achieved informally, each party shall provide a confidential 16 17 settlement statement to Sujean Park, ADR Division, 501 I Street, Suite 4-200, 18 Sacramento, California 95814, or by email to spark@caed.uscourts.gov so they arrive 19 no later than May 15, 2015 and file a “Notice of Submission of Confidential 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. 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). 1 2 1 Settlement Statement” (See L.R. 270(d)). 2 3 Settlement statements should not be filed with the Clerk of the court nor served on 4 any other party. Settlement statements shall be clearly marked “confidential” with 5 the date and time of the settlement conference indicated prominently thereon. 6 7 The confidential settlement statement shall be no longer than five pages in length, 8 typed or neatly printed, and include the following: 9 a. A brief statement of the facts of the case. 10 b. A brief statement of the claims and defenses, i.e., statutory or other grounds upon 11 which the claims are founded; a forthright evaluation of the parties’ likelihood of 12 prevailing on the claims and defenses; and a description of the major issues in 13 dispute. 14 c. A summary of the proceedings to date. 15 d. An estimate of the cost and time to be expended for further discovery, pretrial, and 16 trial. 17 e. The relief sought. 18 f. The party’s position on settlement, including present demands and offers and a 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 history of past settlement discussions, offers, and demands. g. A brief statement of each party’s expectations and goals for the settlement conference. 6. The Clerk of the court is directed to serve a copy of this order on the litigation office at Kern Valley State Prison via facsimile at (661) 720-4949. Dated: May 1, 2015 _____________________________________ CAROLYN K. DELANEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 27 28 3

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?