Espey v. Deuel Vocational Institution

Filing 121

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 03/02/17 ordering ( Settlement Conference set for 4/7/2017 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 24 (CKD) before Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney.) Parties are directed to submit confidential settlement sta tements no later than March 31, 2017 to [e-mail]. If a party desires to share additional confidential information with the Court, they may do so pursuant to the provisions of Local Rule 270(d) and (e). Parties are also directed to file a Notice of Submission of Confidential Settlement Statement (See L.R. 270(d))(cc: CKD). (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

FLOYD ESPEY,

12
13
14

No. 2:13-cv-2147 TLN KJN P
Plaintiff,

v.

ORDER SETTING SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE

DEUEL VOCATIONAL INSTITUTION,
et al.,

15
Defendants.
16
17

Plaintiff is a former state prisoner, proceeding through counsel, with a civil rights action

18

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The court has determined that this case will benefit from a

19

settlement conference. Therefore, this case will be referred to Magistrate Judge Carolyn K.

20

Delaney to conduct a settlement conference at the U. S. District Court, 501 I Street, Sacramento,

21

California 95814 in Courtroom #24 on April 7, 2017, 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 April 7, 2017, 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 March

8

31, 2017 to [e-mail]. If a party desires to share additional

9

confidential information with the Court, they may do so pursuant to the provisions of

10

Local Rule 270(d) and (e). Parties are also directed to file a “Notice of Submission of

11

Confidential Settlement Statement” (See L.R. 270(d)).

12
13

Settlement statements should not be filed with the Clerk of the Court nor served on

14

any other party. Settlement statements shall be clearly marked “confidential” with

15

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

16
17

The confidential settlement statement shall be no longer than five pages in length,

18

typed or neatly printed, and include the following:

19

a. A brief statement of the facts of the case.

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

b. A brief statement of the claims and defenses, i.e., statutory or other grounds upon

2

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

3

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

4

dispute.

5

c. A summary of the proceedings to date.

6

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

7

trial.

8

e. The relief sought.

9

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

10
11
12
13

history of past settlement discussions, offers, and demands.
g. A brief statement of each party’s expectations and goals for the settlement
conference.
Dated: March 2, 2017

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

3