Aguilar et al v. The United States of America

Filing 35

ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that 34 plaintiffs' petition to approve a compromise settlement on behalf of a minor be, and the same hereby is, DENIED, without prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, if the parties wish to clarify why these documents lack the discussed signature or otherwise intend to cure the deficiency, the amended petition or relevant declaration shall be submitted within fourteen (14) days of the date of this order. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 5/18/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6

***

7
8

MARCO ANTONIO AGUILAR and
OLALLA KENDY AGUILAR,

ORDER
Plaintiff(s),

9
10
11

Case No. 2:16-CV-153 JCM (CWH)

v.
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant(s).

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge

Presently before the court is plaintiffs’ unopposed petition for approval of a settlement
made on behalf of a minor. (ECF No. 34).
Accompanying the motion, inter alia, are two documents particularly relevant here. First,
plaintiff filed a stipulation for compromise settlement and release of claims brought under the
Federal Tort Claims Act. (ECF No. 34-6). Next, plaintiff offered a document creating an
irrevocable reversionary inter vivos grantor medical care trust. (Id.).
However, the court will not approve the settlement at this time because both documents
lack Assistant United States Attorney Lindsy Roberts’ signature, although unpopulated fields are
provided for the same. Moreover, the petition was filed solely by the plaintiffs, as is the
accompanying proposed order. (ECF Nos. 34, 34-6).
This court is cognizant that a term of the settlement agreement is that “[p]laintiffs must
obtain [a] court Order before the Torts Branch will seek settlement authority from the Attorney
General or the Attorney General’s designee.” (ECF No. 34-6 at 15). However, the parties have
not made explicit whether this condition is the reason why Ms. Roberts has not yet signed the
documents.

1

Because the present petition was not filed jointly and because there is no other submission

2

indicating that the offered documents are those contemplated by both the defendant and the

3

government in the course of their settlement negotiations, this court cannot approve the settlement.

4

Accordingly,

5

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that plaintiffs’ petition to

6

approve a compromise settlement on behalf of a minor (ECF No. 34) be, and the same hereby is,

7

DENIED, without prejudice.

8

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, if the parties wish to clarify why these documents lack

9

the discussed signature or otherwise intend to cure the deficiency, the amended petition or relevant

10
11
12
13

declaration shall be submitted within fourteen (14) days of the date of this order.
DATED May 18, 2017.
__________________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge

-2-