J.M.B. et al v. Red Bluff Joint Union High School District
Filing
38
ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 1/29/2021 DISMISSING this Action with Prejudice, Constituting a Final Dismissal of this Action. CASE CLOSED.(Becknal, R)
1 Sloan R. Simmons, SBN 233752
LOZANO SMITH
2 One Capitol Mall, Suite 640
Sacramento, CA 95814
3 Telephone: (916) 329-7433
Facsimile: (916) 329-9050
4
Attorneys for Defendant
5 RED BLUFF JOINT UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
LOZANO SMITH
One Capitol Mall, Suite 640, Sacramento, CA 95814
Tel 916-329-7433 Fax 916-329-9050
10
11 T.S., by and through their next friend JERAMIE
STRUTHERS; J.M.B. and J.E.B., by and through
12 their next fried JAMES BRANDT; E.A., by and
through her next friend HAZEL BRANDT; C.K.
13 by and through her next friend TERESA HILL;
and G.K. by and through her next friend
14 LESLIANN JONES and all others similarly
situated,
15
Plaintiffs,
16
vs.
17
RED BLUFF JOINT UNION HIGH SCHOOL
18 DISTRICT,
19
Case No. 2:17-CV-00489-TLN-EFB
NOTICE OF COMPLETION OF
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
MONITORING PERIOD; AND ORDER RE:
FINAL DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE
Judge:
Courtroom:
Action Filed:
Hon. Troy L. Nunley
7
March 7, 2017
Defendant.
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Not. of Completion of Settlement Monitoring Period;
& Order Re: Final Dismissal With Prejudice
T.S., et al v. Red Bluff JUHSD, et al.
Case No. 2:17-cv-00489-TLN-EFB
1
2
3
TO THE HONORABLE COURT, PLAINTIFFS AND THEIR COUNSEL OF RECORD
HEREIN:
Defendant RED BLUFF JOINT UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT (“District”) hereby
4
requests that you PLEASE TAKE NOTICE OF THE FOLLOWING and correspondingly requests the
5
Court enter a Final Dismissal with Prejudice in this action:
6
1.
This action was initiated on March 7, 2017. ECF DOC. NO. 1.
7
2.
On November 14, 2017, the Parties jointly moved the Court for an order “concerning the
8
Parties’ settlement of the . . . Action . . . , which, if entered, conditionally dismisses the Action, without
9
prejudice, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 41 (a)(2), with this Court retaining jurisdiction to enforce the
LOZANO SMITH
One Capitol Mall, Suite 640, Sacramento, CA 95814
Tel 916-329-7433 Fax 916-329-9050
10
settlement.” ECF DOC. NO. 31 at 2. The joint motion also sought the Court to retain jurisdiction and, at
11
a later date, enter a final dismissal with prejudice in the action, following certain conditions having been
12
met. ECF DOC. NO. 31 at 2. Attached to said request and motion as Exhibit A was the proposed order
13
on the motion, and attached as Exhibit B was an endorsed copy of the parties’ subject settlement
14
agreement. See ECF DOC. NO. 31 at 3-53.
15
3.
On November 16, 2017, the Court entered an order which served to enter the Parties’
16
settlement agreement, conditionally dismissing the action without prejudice, with the Court retaining
17
jurisdiction. ECF DOC. NO. 33. Among other provisions, the Court’s November 16, 2017 Order
18
provided: “that the Court shall issue a final judgment with prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 54
19
and subject to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, on occurrence of one of the events representing fulfillment of the
20
Settlement Agreement as provided in Section F.7 of the Agreement[.]” ECF DOC. NO. 33 at 2. The
21
Court’s order also provided “that for all other purposes, this civil action is to be placed on the inactive
22
docket, subject to recall to the active docket, should enforcement of the Agreement be necessary.”
23
ECF DOC. NO. 33 at 2.
24
4.
Consistent with the November 14, 2017 motion, and the Court’s November 16, 2017
25
order, Paragraph F.7 of the parties’ settlement agreement provides as follows, in relevant part: “If the
26
Court grants the parties’ motion for a conditional dismissal, then a conditional dismissal will be
27
followed by a final dismissal with prejudice either on performance of the terms of the Agreement
28
Not. of Completion of Settlement Monitoring Period;
& Order Re: Final Dismissal With Prejudice
-2-
T.S., et al v. Red Bluff JUHSD, et al.
Case No. 2:17-cv-00489-TLN-EFB
1
at the end of the three year term, or as stipulated to by the parties unless Plaintiffs successfully
2
petition to extend the term of the agreement.” ECF DOC. NO. 31 at 12 (emphasis added).
3
5.
The terms which the District was obligated to complete under the settlement agreement
4
are set forth at pages 8 through 19 of the agreement, all of which were subject to monitoring for
5
compliance by an Independent Title IX Consultant, as set forth at pages 17 and 18 of the settlement
6
agreement. See ECF DOC. NO. 31 at 16-27.
7
6.
The term of the Court’s continuing jurisdiction, overlapping with the settlement
8
agreement monitoring period of the Independent Title IX Consultant, was three years, and that three
9
year period concluded in the fall of 2020. See ECF DOC. NO. 31 at 26.
LOZANO SMITH
One Capitol Mall, Suite 640, Sacramento, CA 95814
Tel 916-329-7433 Fax 916-329-9050
10
7.
Attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated by reference is the October 30, 2017
11
letter to the District from the Independent Title IX Consultant, in which the Independent Title IX
12
Consultant confirms the District’s successful completion and satisfaction of the settlement agreement
13
during the three-year monitoring period, and otherwise successful implementation of the District’s
14
obligations under the settlement agreement terms. See EX. A at 3.
15
8.
Based upon the District’s successful satisfaction of the settlement agreement’s terms as
16
memorialized by the Independent Title IX Consultant in Exhibit A, pursuant to this Court’s November
17
16, 2017 Order and paragraph F.7 of the Parties’ settlement agreement, the Court must now enter a
18
“final dismissal with prejudice . . . on performance of the terms of the agreement at the end of the three
19
year term . . . .” See ECF DOC. NO. 31 at 12.
20
Dated: January 28, 2021
21
Respectfully Submitted,
LOZANO SMITH
22
/s/ Sloan R. Simmons
SLOAN R. SIMMONS
Attorney for Defendant
RED BLUFF JOINT UNION HIGH SCHOOL
DISTRICT
23
24
25
26
27
28
Not. of Completion of Settlement Monitoring Period;
& Order Re: Final Dismissal With Prejudice
-3-
T.S., et al v. Red Bluff JUHSD, et al.
Case No. 2:17-cv-00489-TLN-EFB
1
ORDER
2
Pursuant to the foregoing Notice, the Court’s November 16, 2017 Order, and the Parties’
3
Settlement Agreement entered by this Court on November 6, 2017, and GOOD CAUSE APPEARING
4
THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
5
The District having successfully completed satisfaction of the terms of the Parties’ Settlement
6
Agreement over the designated three-year monitoring period, this Action is Dismissed with Prejudice,
7
constituting a final dismissal of this Action, and this Action is hereby closed.
8
9
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 29, 2021
LOZANO SMITH
One Capitol Mall, Suite 640, Sacramento, CA 95814
Tel 916-329-7433 Fax 916-329-9050
10
Troy L. Nunley
United States District Judge
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Not. of Completion of Settlement Monitoring Period;
& Order Re: Final Dismissal With Prejudice
-4-
T.S., et al v. Red Bluff JUHSD, et al.
Case No. 2:17-cv-00489-TLN-EFB
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?