McCormack v. Westland et al

Filing 94

ORDER (1) Denying Plaintiff's 92 Motion for Reconsideration and (2) Resetting and Modifying Process for Executing Settlement Documents. Signed by District Judge Matthew F. Leitman. (HMon)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
MARIA MCCORMACK,
Plaintiff,

Case No. 15-cv-14507
Hon. Matthew F. Leitman

v.
CITY OF WESTLAND, et al.,
Defendants.
_________________________________/
ORDER (1) DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERATION (ECF #92) AND (2) RESETTING AND MODIFYING
PROCESS FOR EXECUTING SETTLEMENT DOCUMENTS
On July 30, 2018, the Court entered an Amended Order in which it granted
the Westland Defendants’1 motion to enforce the settlement (ECF #76), granted the
Highland Landscape Defendants’2 motion to enforce the settlement (ECF #77), and
denied Plaintiff’s motion to hold at least part of the settlement unenforceable (ECF
#78). (See ECF #90.) The Amended Order also set forth a process by which the
parties would execute the necessary settlement documents. (See id.)

1

The Westland Defendants are Defendants Officer Abramski, Brenn Dohring, Kelly
Eggers, Tom Lutkenhoff, Chris Szpara, Wayne Westland Fire Association, City of
Westland, and Tim Wilson.
2
The Highland Landscape Defendants are Defendants Highland Landscape and
Snowplowing, Jeff Speaks, Gage Speaks, Alfredo Vega, and Jose Vega.
1

Plaintiff has now filed a motion for reconsideration of the Amended Order.
(See ECF #92.) She also contends that the Westland Defendants failed to send her
an executable settlement agreement and that the Highland Landscape Defendants
sent her a written agreement that does not accurately reflect the settlement terms.
(See id. at Pg. ID 1234-35.)
The Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration of the Amended
Order. To succeed on a motion for reconsideration, “[t]he movant  must not only
demonstrate a palpable defect by which the Court and the parties and other persons
entitled to be heard on the motion have been misled but also show that correcting
the defect will result in a different disposition of the case.” L.R. 7.1(h). Plaintiff has
neither demonstrated a palpable defect in the Amended Order nor shown how any
defect would have resulted in a different disposition of the motions. Plaintiff largely
restates the arguments she made in her motion and in response to the Defendants’
respective motions, and the Court rejects those arguments for the same reasons it did
so in the Amended Order.
In light of Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration, the Court resets and modifies
the process for executing the settlement documents as set forth below.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration (ECF
#92) is DENIED.

2

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
(1) By not later than August 21, 2018, the Westland Defendants shall mail to
Plaintiff an executable copy of the agreement attached to Plaintiff’s
response to the Westland Defendants’ motion to enforce (ECF #81 at Pg.
ID 1087-89) (the “December Version”) and a Form W-9. The Westland
Defendants shall mail these documents even if they had been sent prior to
entry of this Order;
(2) By not later than August 22, 2018, the Westland Defendants shall file a
certificate on the docket verifying that they sent the December Version and
Form W-9 to Plaintiff. The Westland Defendants shall file with that
certificate a copy of the documents sent to Plaintiff;
(3) By not later than September 5, 2018, Plaintiff shall execute the December
Version, complete the Westland Defendants’ Form W-9, and mail both
documents to counsel of record for the Westland Defendants; and
(4) Plaintiff shall file a certificate on the Court’s docket confirming that she
executed the December Version, completed the Westland Defendants’
Form W-9, and mailed both documents to counsel of record for the
Westland Defendants. Plaintiff’s certification must be received by the
Clerk of the Court by not later than September 11, 2018.

3

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT:
(1) By not later than August 21, 2018, the Highland Landscape Defendants
shall mail to Plaintiff an executable copy of the settlement agreement
between the Highland Landscape Defendants and Plaintiff and a Form W9. The settlement agreement shall conform to the relevant terms placed on
the record at the October 17, 2017, settlement conference, as clarified at
the December 18, 2017, status conference. The Highland Landscape
Defendants shall mail these documents even if they had been sent prior to
entry of this Order;
(2) By not later than August 22, 2018, the Highland Landscape Defendants
shall file a certificate on the docket verifying that they sent the executable
settlement agreement and Form W-9 to Plaintiff. The Highland Landscape
Defendants shall file with that certificate a copy of the documents sent to
Plaintiff;
(3) By not later than September 5, 2018, Plaintiff shall execute the copy of
the Highland Landscape Defendants’ settlement agreement, complete the
Highland Landscape Defendants’ Form W-9, and mail both documents to
counsel of record for the Highland Landscape Defendants; and
(4) Plaintiff shall file a certificate on the Court’s docket confirming that she
executed the Highland Landscape Defendants’ settlement agreement,
4

completed the Highland Landscape Defendants’ Form W-9, and mailed
both documents to counsel of record for the Highland Landscape
Defendants. Plaintiff’s certification must be received by the Clerk of the
Court by not later than September 11, 2018.
Plaintiff’s failure to comply with this Order will result in dismissal of this
action with prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Matthew F. Leitman
MATTHEW F. LEITMAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: August 20, 2018

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties
and/or counsel of record on August 20, 2018, by electronic means and/or ordinary
mail.
s/Holly A. Monda
Case Manager
[phone]

5