Estate of Mark Anthony Scott et al v. County of Sacramento et al

Filing 83

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 4/3/2015 GRANTING 79 Motion for issuance of a new settlement check. Within 30 days of this order, and pursuant to the parties' settlement agreement in this matter, defendant County of Sacramento shall issue and provide to plaintiffs' counsel a new settlement check made payable to Mary Scott individually. (Zignago, K.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

ESTATE OF MARK ANTHONY SCOTT,
et al.,
Plaintiffs,

13
14
15

No. 2:13-cv-0024-GEB-KJN

ORDER
v.
COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17
18

On April 2, 2015, the court conducted a hearing on plaintiffs’ motion to compel defendant

19

County of Sacramento to issue a new settlement check. (ECF No. 79.) At the hearing, attorney

20

Stewart Katz appeared on behalf of plaintiffs, and attorney Jesse Rivera appeared on behalf of

21

defendants.

22
23
24
25

For the reasons discussed with the parties on the record at the hearing, IT IS HEREBY
ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiffs’ motion for issuance of a new settlement check (ECF No. 79) is GRANTED
on the terms outlined in this order.

26

2. Within 30 days of this order, and pursuant to the parties’ settlement agreement in this

27

matter, defendant County of Sacramento shall issue and provide to plaintiffs’ counsel

28
1

a new settlement check made payable to Mary Scott individually.1

1
2

3. The court’s order requiring issuance of the new settlement check, as outlined above, is

3

with recognition that, by endorsing, cashing, and/or depositing the new settlement

4

check made payable to Mary Scott individually, Mary Scott does so BOTH (a) in her

5

individual capacity, AND (b) in her capacity as successor in interest to the Estate of

6

Mark Anthony Scott, deceased. Importantly, the issuance and acceptance of a new

7

settlement check made payable to Mary Scott individually, which is done for the

8

essentially administrative purpose of rendering the settlement check negotiable, does

9

not in any way alter the settlement agreement or any of the releases and

10

indemnifications set forth in that settlement agreement.

11
12

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: April 3, 2015

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

1

Although the parties’ settlement agreement calls for payment to be made to the “Estate of Mark
Anthony Scott, deceased, by and through Mary Scott as Successor In Interest and Mary Scott,
individually,” defendant County of Sacramento, due to space and character limitations imposed
by its check writing program, has issued a check made payable to “Mary Scott Individually &
The Estate of Mark Anthony Scott.” However, for the reasons stated in greater detail in the
parties’ briefing concerning plaintiffs’ motion, no bank has been willing to accept the check as
issued. (See ECF No. 82.) At the hearing, plaintiffs’ counsel returned that check to defendants’
counsel.
2