Mitchell v. Cox et al

Filing 97

ORDER Denying Defendants' 96 Motion to Excuse Their Personal Appearance at Settlement Conference. Settlement Conference continued to 8/25/2016 09:30 AM in LV Chambers before Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe. The parties shall submit s upplemental settlement statements to chambers no later than 8/11/2016. Defense counsel shall immediately contact both Plaintiff and the prison officials coordinating Plaintiff's appearance at the settlement conference regarding this order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 5/17/2016. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
10
TARZ MITCHELL,
11
Plaintiff(s),
12
vs.
13
GREG COX, et al.,
14
Defendant(s).
15

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 2:12-cv-00499-RFB-NJK
ORDER
(Docket No. 96)

16

Pending before the Court is a motion to excuse various defendants from appearing at the

17

settlement conference set in this case in three days, on May 20, 2016, Docket No. 96, which is hereby

18

DENIED. The crux of the motion is that defendants believe that they may be dismissed from this case

19

based on statements made from the bench by United States District Judge Richard F. Boulware II during

20

a hearing on the pending motion for summary judgment. See id. Given the circumstances, the Court

21

will CONTINUE the settlement conference until August 25, 2016, at 9:30 a.m. The parties shall submit

22

supplemental settlement statements to chambers no later than August 11, 2016. Moreover, in the event

23

a written decision on the pending motion for summary judgment has not issued by August 11, 2016,

24

Defendants may file a further request to continue the settlement conference. Defense counsel shall

25

immediately contact both Plaintiff and the prison officials coordinating Plaintiff’s appearance at

26

the settlement conference regarding this order.

27

Lastly, defense counsel, Frank Toddre, represents that he has contacted the undersigned’s staff

28

on several occasions regarding the timing of the issuance of a written decision on Defendants’ pending

1

motion for summary judgment. See id. at 2. Attorneys are not permitted to contact the undersigned’s

2

staff regarding the timing of the Court’s issuance of a decision. If an attorney seeks to inform the Court

3

that an order has not been issued, he must send a letter in compliance with the requirements outlined in

4

Local Rule IA 7-1(a). An attorney is otherwise prohibited from sending written communication or

5

telephoning the Court regarding the pendency of a motion. See, e.g., Local Rules IA 7-1(b), 7-2(b). If

6

an attorney believes the continued pendency of a motion impacts an upcoming proceeding in a way that

7

requires relief, the proper course is to file a request on the docket explaining that circumstance and

8

requesting relief.

9
10

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: May 17, 2016

11
12

______________________________________
Nancy J. Koppe
United States Magistrate Judge

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2