Griego et al v. Steinhage et al
Filing
67
ORDER Setting Early Neutral Evaluation. An early neutral evaluation is hereby scheduled in this case for September 24, 2013 in Courtroom C-201, Second Floor of the Byron Rogers U.S. Courthouse, 1929 Stout Street, Denver, Colorado. The conference will begin at 1:30 p.m. and is set for two hours. By Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya on 07/25/13. (alvsl)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya
Civil Action No. 12–cv–01392–RM–KMT
AMANDA GRIEGO, and
C. F., her minor child by and through his next friend, Amanda Griego,
Plaintiffs,
v.
OFFICER ALAN STEINHAGE, in his individual capacity,
AGENT CHRIS AMON, in his individual capacity,
AGENT NICHOLAS HORN, in his individual capacity,
AGENT ANDREW REMINGTON, in his individual capacity,
Defendants.
ORDER SETTING EARLY NEUTRAL EVALUATION
An early neutral evaluation is hereby scheduled in this case for September 24, 2013 in
Courtroom C-201, Second Floor of the Byron Rogers U.S. Courthouse, 1929 Stout Street,
Denver, Colorado. The conference will begin at 1:30 p.m. and is set for two hours.
Counsel shall have parties present who shall have full authority to negotiate all terms and
demands presented by the case, and full authority to enter into a settlement agreement, including
an adjustor if an insurance company is involved. The presence of an insurance adjustor,
however, does not excuse the attendance of the party represented.
“Full authority” means that the person who attends the settlement conference has
the complete and unfettered capacity and authority to meet or pay all terms or amounts
which are demanded or sought by the other side of the case without consulting with some
other person, committee or agency. If the representative attending the early neutral evaluation
can only receive authority to increase a pre-determined amount of money by making a telephone
call to someone else, the person to whom the phone call is made is the correct participant in the
settlement conference. If any person has limits upon the extent or amount within which he or
she is authorized to settle on behalf of a party, that person does not have “full authority.” This
requirement is not fulfilled by the presence of counsel.
No party or party representative shall be permitted to participate in the settlement
conference by telephone, unless that party has obtained leave of court following the filing of an
appropriate motion no later than five business days prior to the settlement conference date. Such
requests are not favored by the court.
The parties, through their respective counsel, are each directed to prepare a Confidential
Position Statement, not to exceed fifteen pages, and submit the same by email only to Magistrate
Judge Tafoya no later than September 17, 2013. The Confidential Position Statement should
contain the following information:
1.
A summary of the evidence, including:
a.
a numbered list of the known significant disputed issues of fact; and
b.
a numbered list of the known significant disputed legal issues.
2.
A candid assessment of the case from the presenter’s point of view.
3.
Remarks toward any perceived weaknesses in the case.
4.
An accurate and complete history of settlement negotiations, including dates, if
known, and amounts of demands and offers.
5.
A computation of damages, including the theory of calculation and any legal
limitations on damages, and a demand or offer each client will accept or pay in
settlement (including any essential non-economic terms).
6.
Any observations or additional information which would be helpful to Magistrate
Judge Tafoya in assisting the parties to negotiate a settlement.
The document is to be emailed to Magistrate Judge Tafoya (not submitted for filing to
-2-
the court) at Tafoya_Chambers@cod.uscourts.gov, in accordance with the electronic filing
procedures of this court.
Dated this 25th day of July, 2013.
BY THE COURT:
Kathleen M. Tafoya
United States Magistrate Judge
-3-
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?