Joseph v. Parciasepe, et al.

Filing 60

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 4/6/2017 DENYING 59 Request for court intervention with respect to payment pursuant to the settlement agreement WITHOUT PREJUDICE as premature. (Washington, S)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ALONZO JAMES JOSEPH, 12 13 14 No. 2:14-cv-414-GEB-AC P Plaintiff, v. ORDER T. PARCIASEPE, 15 Defendant. 16 17 18 19 On January 18, 2017, the undersigned conducted a settlement conference in this matter, in 20 the course of which the case was settled. (ECF No. 56.) At the time, the undersigned advised 21 plaintiff that payment pursuant to the terms of the settlement could take up to six (6) months, and 22 that he should contact defendant’s counsel if payment has not yet occurred by that point. On 23 January 23, 2017, the case was dismissed pursuant to the parties’ stipulation of dismissal. (ECF 24 Nos. 57, 58.) 25 Thereafter, on March 27, 2017, the court received a letter from plaintiff dated March 22, 26 2017, indicating that he has not yet received payment and that defendant’s counsel has not 27 responded to a letter from plaintiff inquiring regarding payment. (ECF No. 59.) Plaintiff 28 acknowledges that only approximately 63 days had passed since the settlement conference at the 1 1 2 time that he sent the March 22, 2017 letter, but nonetheless seeks the court’s intervention. (Id.) As plaintiff was advised at the settlement conference, payment can take up to six (6) 3 months to occur. Therefore, plaintiff’s request for court intervention is premature. Plaintiff shall 4 wait until expiration of the six (6) month period before contacting defendant’s counsel. If, at that 5 juncture, payment has not yet occurred, and plaintiff does not receive a response from defendant’s 6 counsel within a reasonable period of time, plaintiff may renew his request for court intervention 7 at that time. 8 9 10 11 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s request for court intervention with respect to payment pursuant to the settlement agreement (ECF No. 59) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as premature. Dated: April 6, 2017 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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?