Haynes v. Hedgpeth et al

Filing 89

Order by Magistrate Judge Nandor J. Vadas denying 84 Motion for Default. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(njvlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/18/2016)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6

EUREKA DIVISION

7
8

DONTAVIAS HAYNES,

Case No. 12-cv-00363-JST (NJV)

Plaintiff,
9

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
DEFAULT

v.
10
11

ANTHONY HEDGPETH, et al.,

Re: Dkt. No. 84

United States District Court
Northern District of California

Defendants.
12
13
14

The undersigned held a settlement conference in this case on June 18, 2015, at which the

15

matter was settled. (Doc. 74.) On November 12, 2015, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Default,

16

claiming that Defendants had breached the settlement agreement by failing to pay him the agreed-

17

upon settlement. (Doc. 84.) On December 14, 2015, District Judge Tigar referred this matter to

18

the undersigned. (Doc. 85.) On January 22, 2016, the court entered an order requiring Defendants

19

to respond to Plaintiff's motion. (Doc. 86.)

20

Defendants filed their response to Plaintiff's motion on January 27, 2016. (Doc. 87.)

21

In their response, Defendants argue that default should not be entered because Plaintiff has

22

received his settlement award. Defendants assert that on October 22, 2014, the settlement amount

23

of $7,500 was transferred to Plaintiff’s client trust account. (Decl. of C. Mills, ¶ 2, Ex. A.)

24

Defendants explain that California law requires that settlement proceeds be paid to the California

25

Victims Compensation and Government Claims Board to satisfy outstanding victim’s

26

restitution orders or fines against an inmate, with the balance forwarded to the payee. Cal. Penal

27

Code § 2085(n). At the time of settlement, Plaintiff owed $ 5,812.26 in victim restitution. (Decl.

28

of C. Mills, ¶ 2.) Plaintiff was also charged a 5% administrative fee in the amount of $290.61, as

1

required under Penal Code § 2085.5(e). (Id.) After these deductions, the amount deposited into

2

Plaintiff’s trust account was $1,397.13. (Id.)

3

Plaintiff has not responded to Defendants' response to his motion. Based on the above

4

information provided by Defendants, the court finds that Defendants have complied with the terms

5

of the settlement and that there is no basis for the entry of default. Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion

6

is HEREBY DENIED.

7

IT IS SO ORDERED.

8

Dated: February 18, 2016

9
10

______________________________________
NANDOR J. VADAS
United States Magistrate Judge

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2