Harris v. Fernan et al

Filing 42

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 5/9/2018 GRANTING 38 Motion to Appoint Counsel; APPOINTING Michael E. Vinding as limited purpose counsel of assisting plaintiff with preparing for and participating in a settlement conference; DENYING 39 Motion to Expedite ADR Hearing; VACATING 6/5/2018 settlement conference; and VACATING 41 Writ of Habeas Corpus Ad Testificandum. Michael E. Vinding's appointment will terminate 15 days after completion of the settlement confere nce or any continuation of the settlement conference. Within 2 weeks from the date of this order, both parties' counsel to contact Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman's courtroom deputy to select a new settlement conference date. (cc: Out-To-Court Desk) (Henshaw, R) Modified on 5/10/2018 (Henshaw, R).

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 WAYDE HOLLIS HARRIS, 12 13 14 15 No. 2:17-cv-0680 TLN KJN P Plaintiff, v. ORDER APPOINTING LIMITED PURPOSE COUNSEL FOR SETTLEMENT S. KERNAN, et al., Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, and proceeds pro se with a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. 18 § 1983. Michael E. Vinding was selected from the Court’s Pro Bono Attorney Panel to represent 19 plaintiff for the limited purpose of settlement, and agreed to be appointed. Therefore, plaintiff’s 20 motion to appoint counsel is granted. The June 5, 2018 settlement conference and writ of habeas 21 corpus ad testificandum for plaintiff’s attendance at the settlement conference are vacated. 22 Within two weeks from the date of this order, plaintiff’s and defendants’ counsel shall contact the 23 undersigned’s courtroom deputy, Alexandra Waldrop, awaldrop@caed.uscourts.gov, or (916) 24 930-4187, to select a new settlement conference date. Once the new date is selected, the court 25 will issue a writ for plaintiff’s attendance at the conference. 26 In addition, plaintiff filed a motion to expedite the settlement conference. However, now 27 that counsel has been appointed, the court must allow counsel time to familiarize himself with the 28 file and communicate with plaintiff. Plaintiff’s motion is denied. 1 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. Plaintiff’s motion to appoint counsel (ECF No. 38) is granted; 3 2. Michael E. Vinding is appointed as limited purpose counsel in the above entitled 4 matter. This appointment is for the limited purpose of assisting plaintiff with preparing for and 5 participating in a settlement conference. 6 3. Michael E. Vinding’s appointment will terminate fifteen days after completion of the 7 settlement conference, or any continuation of the settlement conference. Prior to the termination 8 of the appointment, the court will accord counsel the option of proceeding as plaintiff’s appointed 9 counsel. If counsel does not wish to continue representation of plaintiff after he has carried out 10 his limited purpose, the court will consider appointing new counsel for plaintiff, if deemed 11 appropriate at that time. 12 13 4. Appointed counsel shall notify Sujean Park at (916) 930-4278, or via email at spark@caed.uscourts.gov if he has any questions related to the appointment. 14 5. The June 5, 2018 settlement conference is vacated; 15 6. The May 1, 2018 writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum is vacated; 16 7. Plaintiff’s motion (ECF No. 39) is denied; 17 8. Within two weeks from the date of this order, both parties’ counsel shall contact the 18 19 undersigned’s courtroom deputy to select a new settlement conference date; and 9. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this order upon: 20 21 A. Michael E. Vinding, Brady & Vinding, 520 Capitol Mall, Suite 630, Sacramento, CA 95814; 22 23 B. Warden, California State Prison, Solano, P.O. Box 4000, Vacaville, CA 95696-4000; and 24 25 C. Out-To-Court Desk, California State Prison, Sacramento. Dated: May 9, 2018 26 27 /harr0680.31b 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?