McSweeney v. Gentry

Filing 19

MINUTE ORDER by Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix on 10/31/14. Plaintiff's Motion For Imposition of Settlement Conference Conditions and Request For Expedited Ruling 17 is DENIED.(lgale, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 14-cv-00187-WJM-KLM
SUSAN B. MCSWEENEY
Plaintiff,
v.
ANN B. GENTRY
Defendant.
_____________________________________________________________________
MINUTE ORDER
_____________________________________________________________________
ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion For Imposition of Settlement
Conference Conditions and Request For Expedited Ruling [#17]1 (the “Motion”).
Plaintiff requests that the Court set conditions for a voluntary outside mediation to be
conducted by Conflict Resolution Services on November 18, 2014. Id. at 2-3.
Although the Court applauds the parties’ willingness to engage in an early mediation
of this dispute, the Motion is entirely without merit. First, despite Plaintiff’s contention to the
contrary, D.C.COLO.LCivR 16.6 does not “order” the parties “to participate in a form of
alternate dispute resolution.” Instead, the Local Rule states that “all litigants in civil actions
shall consider the use of an alternative dispute resolution process.” Id. (emphasis added).

Second, despite Plaintiff’s contention to the contrary, there is no legal authority
which suggests that the Court may set conditions for a voluntary settlement conference
which is going to be conducted by a non-judicial neutral. The cases cited by Plaintiff all
involve settlement conferences conducted by a judicial officer of the Court, for which the
judicial officer undoubtedly had authority to establish the requirements of participation.
Lockhart v. Patel, 115 F.R.D. 44 (E.D Ky. 1987) (holding that litigant’s failure to follow
judge’s instruction to bring a representative with full settlement authority to the settlement
conference justified imposition of sanctions); G. Heileman Brewing Co., Inc. v. Joseph Oat

1

“[#17]” is an example of the convention I use to identify the docket number assigned to
a specific paper by the Court’s case management and electronic case filing system (CM/ECF). I
use this convention throughout this Minute Order.

1

Corp., 107 F.R.D. 275 (D. Wis. 1985) (upholding magistrate judge’s requirement that
representatives with full authority to settle be present at settlement conference on grounds
that “by bringing their dispute to a court for resolution, the parties have invoked the use of
an expensive public resource”); Pitman v. Brinker Intern., Inc., 216 F.R.D. 481 (D. Ariz.
2003) (upholding sanctions for party’s failure to comply with order regarding requirements
for settlement conference held by magistrate judge). Plaintiff also cites an Order by
Magistrate Judge Tafoya, but that Order also related to a settlement conference to be
conducted by the Judge.
This Court is unwilling to establish the conditions under which parties who have
voluntarily agreed to mediate their dispute with an outside mediator must conduct that
mediation. The conditions of private, voluntary mediation are properly left to counsel, the
outside mediator, or all of the above.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion [#17] is DENIED.
Dated: October 31, 2014

2