Kawaye v. Water Tec International, Inc. et al

Filing 60

ORDER that 57 Motion for Determination of Good Faith Settlement is DENIED Without Prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Plaintiff shall have until December 17, 2014 to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for failure to communicate with her counsel and failure to execute settlement documents. Failure to timely comply with this order to show cause will result in a recommendation to the district judge that Plaintiffs case be dismissed for failure to comply with this order, failure to communicate with her counsel and failure to prosecute this action. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 12/2/14. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - TR)

Download PDF
    1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 5 *** 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 HIROKO KAWAYE, Case No. 2:12-cv-01670-JCM-PAL Plaintiff, ORDER and ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE v. WATER TEC INTERNATIONAL, INC., et al., (Mot for Determination – Dkt. #57) Defendants. Before the court is Defendant Water Tec International, Inc.’s Motion for Determination of Good Faith Settlement (Dkt. #57). 14 Water Tec and Plaintiff attended a settlement conference with the court on September 29, 15 2014, in which Plaintiff agreed to accept $39,000 to settle her claim against Water Tec 16 International (“WTI”). In the current motion, WTI seeks an order of the court determining that 17 its settlement was reached in good faith for purposes of N.R.S. § 17.245. 18 After the settlement was reached, the court directed counsel to meet and confer to 19 exchange the settlement and release papers, and settlement documents. The parties did so. 20 Unfortunately, at two successive status conferences, counsel for Plaintiff informed the court that 21 his client had failed to communicate with him and had not executed the settlement documents 22 which counsel for Plaintiff agrees accurately reflect the parties’ settlement. 23 The court granted counsel for Plaintiff’s request for a two week extension to again 24 attempt to obtain his client’s cooperation at the first status conference. The court advised counsel 25 for the parties that it was inclined to enter an order to show cause in the event Plaintiff continued 26 to refuse to communicate with her counsel and cooperate in effectuating the parties’ settlement. 27 Counsel for Plaintiff indicated he would communicate this to his client in writing. At the second 28 status conference on November 13, 2014 counsel for Plaintiff advised that he had sent another 1     1 letter certified mail to his client advising her that the court may enter an order to show cause if 2 she failed to communicate and failed to execute settlement documents but that she had still failed 3 to respond. The court gave counsel until November 27, 2014, to file any motion deemed 4 appropriate to resolve the matter given Plaintiff’s failure to communicate with her counsel and 5 execute the documents needed to consummate the settlement. 6 complied. To date, neither party has 7 WTI’s motion does not attach a copy of the parties’ settlement documents, and Plaintiff 8 has not signed the settlement documents or communicated with her counsel. Under these 9 circumstances, 10 11 IT IS ORDERED that Water Tec International’s Motion for Determination of Good Faith Settlement (Dkt. #57) is DENIED without prejudice. 12 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Plaintiff shall have until December 17, 2014 to show 13 cause, in writing, why this case should not be dismissed for her failure to communicate with her 14 counsel and failure to execute settlement documents which her counsel acknowledges accurately 15 reflected the terms of the settlement the parties reached on September 29, 2014. Failure to 16 timely comply with this order to show cause will result in a recommendation to the district 17 judge that Plaintiff’s case be dismissed for failure to comply with this order, failure to 18 communicate with her counsel and failure to prosecute this action. 19 Dated this 2nd day of December, 2014. 20 21 PEGGY A. LEEN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?