Joseph v. Parciasepe, et al.
Filing
51
ORDER SETTING SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 10/13/16. This case is set for a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on January 4, 2017, at 9:30 a.m. at the U. S. District Court, 501 I Street, Sacramento, California 95814 in Courtroom #25. The parties are directed to exchange non-confidential settlement statements 7 days prior to the settlement conference. (cc KJN)(Dillon, M)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
12
ALONZO JAMES JOSEPH,
13
14
15
16
No. 2:14-cv-0414 GEB AC P
Plaintiff,
v.
ORDER SETTING SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE
T. PARCIASEPE, et al.,
Defendants.
17
18
Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel, with a civil rights action pursuant
19
to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The court has determined that this case will benefit from a settlement
20
conference. Therefore, this case will be set for a settlement conference with Magistrate Judge
21
Kendall J. Newman on January 4, 2017, at 9:30 a.m. at the U. S. District Court, 501 I Street,
22
Sacramento, California 95814 in Courtroom #25.
23
In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
24
1. This case is set for a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Kendall J.
25
Newman on January 4, 2017, at 9:30 a.m. at the U. S. District Court, 501 I Street,
26
Sacramento, California 95814 in Courtroom #25.
27
28
1
2. A representative with full and unlimited authority to negotiate and enter into a binding
1
settlement shall attend in person.1
2
3. Those in attendance must be prepared to discuss the claims, defenses and damages.
3
4
The failure of any counsel, party or authorized person subject to this order to appear in
5
person may result in the imposition of sanctions. In addition, the conference will not
6
proceed and will be reset to another date.
7
4. The parties are directed to exchange non-confidential settlement statements seven days
8
prior to the settlement conference. These statements shall simultaneously be delivered
9
to the court using the following email address: kjnorders@caed.uscourts.gov. Plaintiff
10
shall mail his non-confidential settlement statement to arrive not less than seven days
11
prior to the settlement conference, addressed to Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman,
12
USDC CAED, 501 I Street, Suite 4-200, Sacramento, CA 95814. The envelope shall
13
be marked “Settlement Statement.” If a party desires to share additional confidential
14
information with the court, they may do so pursuant to the provisions of Local Rule
15
270(d) and (e).
16
DATED: October 13, 2016
17
18
19
1
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).
2
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?