Center for Legal Advocacy v. Bicha et al

Filing 62

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO REOPEN ACTION FOR ENFORCEMENT OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT by Magistrate Judge Nina Y. Wang on 12/18/5. The Motion to Reopen Action for Enforcement of Settlement Agreement 53 is GRANTED, insofar as it seeks to reopen the case to allow the court to consider whether the Settlement Agreement has been breached and whether to order enforcement; and This matter is set for a Status Conference on December 29, 2015 at 10:00 a.m. to discuss Plaintiff's request for discovery and an evidentiary hearing. On or before December 27, 2015, the Parties will file a Joint Status Report addressing Plaintiff's requested discovery and a proposed scope and procedure for hearing.(bsimm, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02285-NYW
CENTER FOR LEGAL ADVOCACY, d/b/a DISABILITY LAW COLORADO,
Plaintiff,
v.
REGGIE BICHA, in his official capacity as Executive Director of the Colorado Department of
Human Services; and
RONALD B. HALE, in his official capacity as Superintendent of the Colorado Mental Health
Institute at Pueblo,
Defendants.
_____________________________________________________________________________
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO REOPEN ACTION
FOR ENFORCEMENT OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
______________________________________________________________________________
Magistrate Judge Nina Y. Wang
This matter is before the court on the Motion to Reopen Action for Enforcement of
Settlement Agreement [#53, filed on November 18, 2015] pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), the
Order of Reference for all purposes dated February 21, 2012 [#44], and the Reassignment dated
November 19, 2015 [#58].

The court has reviewed the Parties’ briefing [#57, #59], the

Settlement Agreement [#53-1], the entire case file including the court’s Order of Dismissal
[#52], and the applicable case law. There is no dispute between the Parties that this court retains
jurisdiction to enforce the Settlement Agreement. [#57 at 7]. Nevertheless, Defendants contend
that this court should decline to re-open the case because they are not in violation of the
Settlement Agreement or it should only be re-opened for the purposes of formal mediation.
[#57]. Respectfully, Defendants’ position puts the cart before the horse.

The only question that is ripe before the court on the Motion to Reopen is whether this
case should be re-opened to consider Plaintiff’s allegation that the Settlement Agreement has
been breached. In light of Defendants’ concession that errors in reporting did, in fact, occur
repeatedly [#57 at 11], and Plaintiff’s articulated concern regarding mentally-ill detainees, this
court finds that it is appropriate for this case to the re-opened. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED
that:
(1)

The Motion to Reopen Action for Enforcement of Settlement Agreement [#53] is

GRANTED, insofar as it seeks to reopen the case to allow the court to consider whether the
Settlement Agreement has been breached and whether to order enforcement; and
(2)

This matter is set for a Status Conference on December 29, 2015 at 10:00 a.m. to

discuss Plaintiff’s request for discovery and an evidentiary hearing. On or before December 27,
2015, the Parties will meet and confer about and file a Joint Status Report addressing Plaintiff’s
requested discovery and a proposed scope and procedure for hearing.

DATED: December 18, 2015

BY THE COURT:
s/ Nina Y. Wang
Nina Y. Wang
United States Magistrate Judge