Norwood v. Hubbard
Filing
138
ORDER Granting 137 Motion for Further Settlement Conference, signed by Senior Judge Stephen M. McNamee on 6/21/11. Second Settlement Conference set for 7/1/2011 at 10:00 AM at Pleasant Valley State Prison, 24863 West Jayne Avenue, Coalinga, CA 93210, before Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston. (Gonzalez, R)
<![CDATA[
1
2
3
4
5
6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
Kenneth Wilson Norwood,
Plaintiff,
10
11
12
vs.
Suzan Hubbard, et al.,
13
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. 1:07-CV-00889-SMM
ORDER
14
15
Plaintiff is a prisoner proceeding pro se with an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Now
16
pending before the Court is Defendant Carter’s Request for Referral for Further Settlement
17
Conference (Doc. 137). Counsel for Defendant Carter has spoken with Plaintiff and Counsel
18
for Defendants Brandon, Canedo, Covarrubias, Frescura, Gonzales, Keener, Koehler,
19
Maldonado, Morales, Pascua and Price and all represent that they are willing to participate
20
in a settlement conference in order to reach a global settlement of this action as to all claims
21
and defendants.
22
This case was referred to Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston for a prior settlement
23
conference held on June 28, 2010. The case did not settle at that time. Despite an extremely
24
busy docket, Judge Thurston has consented to preside over the requested second conference.
25
Thus, this Court will refer the matter to Judge Thurston with the understanding that the
26
parties’ positions toward settlement have changed in the period since the prior conference
27
and that the parties will work in good faith to resolve the claims at issue.
28
//
//
1
Accordingly,
2
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
3
1. Defendant's request for a further settlement conference is granted;
4
2. This case is referred to Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston and set for
5
a second settlement conference on July 1, 2011, at 10:00 a.m. at Pleasant Valley State
6
Prison, 24863 West Jayne Avenue, Coalinga, California 93210;
7
3. Defendants' lead counsel, including Shanan Hewitt and Jeffrey Steele, and
8
a person with full and unlimited authority to negotiate and enter into a binding settlement on
9
defendants' behalf shall attend in person;1
10
4. ALL parties are to provide confidential settlement conference statements
11
to the following email address: JLTORDERS@CAED.USCOURTS.GOV, or, if the party
12
has no access to email, then to Sujean Park, ADR Coordinator, 501 I Street, Suite 4-200,
13
Sacramento, California 95814, so they arrive no later than June 27, 2011;
14
Settlement statements should not be filed with the Clerk of the Court nor
15
served on any other party. Settlement statements shall be clearly marked “confidential”
16
with the date and time of the settlement conference indicated prominently thereon.
The confidential settlement statement shall be no longer than five pages in
17
18
length, typed or neatly printed, and include the following:
a. A brief statement of the facts of the case.
19
20
21
1
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
The term “full authority to settle” means that the individuals attending the mediation
conference must be authorized to fully explore settlement options and to agree at that time to any
settlement terms acceptable to the parties. G. Heileman Brewing Co., Inc. v. Joseph Oat Corp., 871
F.2d 648, 653 (7th Cir. 1989), cited with approval in Official Airline Guides, Inc. v. Goss, 6 F. 3d
1385, 1396 (9th Cir. 1993). The individual with full authority to settle must also have “unfettered
discretion and authority” to change the settlement position of the party, if appropriate. Pittman v.
Brinker Int’l., Inc., 216 F.R.D. 481, 485-86 (D. Ariz. 2003), amended on recon. in part, Pitman v.
Brinker Int’l, Inc., 2003 WL 23353478 (D. Ariz. 2003). The purpose behind requiring the
attendance of a person with full settlement authority is that the parties’ view of the case may be
altered during the face to face conference. Pitman, 216 F.R.D. at 486. An authorization to settle for
a limited dollar amount or sum certain can be found not to comply with the requirement of full
authority to settle. Nick v. Morgan’s Foods, Inc., 270 F. 3d 590, 596-97 (8th Cir. 2001).
-2-
1
b. A brief statement of the claims and defenses, i.e., statutory or other
2
grounds upon which the claims are founded; a forthright evaluation of the parties' likelihood
3
of prevailing on the claims and defenses; and a description of the major issues in dispute.
4
c. A summary of the proceedings to date.
5
d. An estimate of the cost and time to be expended for further
6
discovery, motions, pretrial, and trial.
7
e. The relief sought.
8
f. The party's position on settlement, including present demands and
9
10
11
offers and a history of past settlement discussions, offers, and demands.
g. A brief statement of each party's expectations and goals for the
settlement conference.
12
5. The parties shall keep the Court apprised of the outcome of the settlement
13
conference. The parties shall file a joint status report within 10 days of the mediation, or if
14
settlement is reached, the parties shall file a Notice of Settlement with the Court.
15
16
17
6. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this order on the
Litigation Office at Pleasant Valley State Prison via facsimile at (559) 935-4928;
DATED this 21st day of June, 2011.
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3-
]]>
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?
