Kuper Industries, LLC et al vs. Reid, et al.

Filing 27

ORDER granting 19 defendants' Motion for Extension of Time to File a Responsive Pleading. The defendants' deadline for responding to the plaintiffs' complaint is stayed pending further order of the court. The defendants' Motion for Settlement Conference, (Filing No. 22 ), is granted. A settlement conference will be held before the undersigned magistrate judge with counsel and representatives of the parties on April 2, 2015, beginning at 1:30 p.m. in the Special Proceedings Courtroom, Roman L. Hruska Federal Courthouse, 111 South 18th Plaza, Omaha, Nebraska. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Cheryl R. Zwart. (JAB)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
KUPER INDUSTRIES, LLC, JAMES W.
KUPER,
8:15CV42
Plaintiffs,
vs.

ORDER

DANIEL REID, ALL THE MARBLES,
LLC, DANIEL REID,
Defendants.
After conferring with counsel,

IT IS ORDERED:

a)

The defendants’ Motion for Extension of Time to File a Responsive

Pleading, (Filing No. 19), is granted, and the defendants’ deadline for responding to the
plaintiffs’ complaint is stayed pending further order of the court.

b)

The parties may now engage in informal or formal discovery focused on

collecting the information needed for informed settlement discussions. Such discovery
shall be completed no later than March 23, 2015.

c)

The defendants’ Motion for Settlement Conference, (Filing No. 22), is

granted as follows:
1) A settlement conference will be held before the undersigned magistrate
judge with counsel and representatives of the parties on April 2, 2015,
beginning at 1:30 p.m. in the Special Proceedings Courtroom, Roman L.
Hruska Federal Courthouse, 111 South 18th Plaza, Omaha, Nebraska. The
parties' representatives and/or counsel shall be prepared to participate and
negotiate a settlement of this case during the conference.

2) Unless excused by order of the court, clients or client representatives with
complete authority to negotiate and consummate a settlement shall be in
attendance at the settlement conference. This requires the presence of the
client or if a corporate, governmental, or other organizational entity, an
authorized representative of the client. The defendant’s representative must
have the authority to commit the defendant to pay, in the representative's
own discretion, the amount needed to settle the case; the plaintiff’s
representative must have the authority, in the representative's own
discretion, to authorize dismissal of the case with prejudice, or to accept the
amount offered and needed to settle the case. If board approval is required
to authorize settlement, the attendance of at least one sitting member of the
board (preferably the chairperson) authorized to settle as described above is
required. Any insurance company that is a party or is contractually
required to defend or to pay damages, if any, assessed within its policy
limits in this case must have a fully authorized settlement representative
present. Counsel are responsible for timely advising any involved nonparty insurance company of the requirements of this order. If trial counsel
has been fully authorized to commit the client to pay or to accept in
settlement the amount last proposed by the opponent, in counsel's sole
discretion, the client, client representative, or insurance company
representative, as applicable, need not attend. The purpose of this
requirement is to have in attendance a representative who has both the
authority to exercise his or her own discretion, and the realistic freedom to
exercise such discretion without negative consequences, in order to settle
the case during the settlement conference without consulting someone else
who is not physically present. In the event counsel for any party is aware
of any circumstance which might cast doubt on a client’s compliance with
this paragraph, s/he shall immediately discuss the circumstance with
opposing counsel to resolve it before the settlement conference, and, if such
discussion does not resolve it, request a telephone conference with the court
and counsel.
3) If a party fails to comply with paragraph (c)(2) of this order, the settlement
conference will be cancelled and costs, attorney fees, and sanctions may be
imposed by the court against the non-complying party, counsel for that
party, or both.
4) Prior to the settlement conference, counsel shall discuss settlement with
their respective clients and insurance representatives, and shall exchange
with opposing counsel proposals for settlement so the parameters of
settlement have been explored well in advance. If as a result of such
discussions, counsel for any party believes that the parties' respective
2

settlement positions are so divergent, or for any other reason, that
settlement is not reasonably possible in this matter, he or she shall seek a
conference with the undersigned and opposing counsel, by telephone or
otherwise, to determine whether the settlement conference should be
canceled or postponed. To avoid unnecessarily incurring travel and other
expenses if the settlement conference is canceled or postponed, any request
for a conference to discuss cancellation or postponement must be made on
or before March 27, 2015.
5) Counsel shall submit a confidential settlement statement to the undersigned
by email to [e-mail] no later than March 31, 2015, setting
forth the relevant positions of the parties concerning factual issues, issues
of law, damages, and the settlement negotiation history of the case,
including a recitation of any specific demands and offers that have been
conveyed. Since the undersigned magistrate judge will have no further
substantive involvement in this case, this statement should describe candid
and confidential interests or positions that in counsel’s opinion may be
preeminent in negotiating a settlement; copies should NOT be served on
opposing counsel or parties.
6) Notwithstanding the provisions of Rule 408, Fed. R. Evid., all statements
made by the parties relating to the substance or merits of the case, whether
written or oral, made for the first time during the settlement conference
shall be deemed to be confidential and shall not be admissible in evidence
for any reason in the trial of the case, should the case not settle. This
provision does not preclude admissibility in other contexts, such as
pertaining to a motion for sanctions regarding the settlement conference.
February 13, 2015.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Cheryl R. Zwart
United States Magistrate Judge

3