Lavigne v. Johnson ( 2020 )

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 SAMUEL J. LAVIGNE, No. 2:19-cv-00186-TLN- CKD 13 Plaintiff, 14 v. ORDER SETTING SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE 15 STEPHEN JOHNSON et al., 16 Defendants. 17 18 Plaintiff is proceeding through counsel in this federal civil rights action filed pursuant to 19 42 U.S.C. §1983. The court has determined that this case will benefit from a settlement 20 conference. Therefore, this case will be referred to Magistrate Judge Dennis M. Cota to conduct a 21 settlement conference at the U. S. District Court, 501 I Street, Sacramento, California 95814 in 22 Courtroom #4 on March 24, 2020 at 1:30 p.m. 23 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 24 1. This case is set for a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Dennis M. Cota on 25 March 24, 2020 at 1:30 p.m. at the U. S. District Court, 501 I Street, Sacramento, 26 California 95814 in Courtroom #4. 27 2. A representative with full and unlimited authority to negotiate and enter into a binding 28 2 settlement on the defendants’ behalf shall attend in person.1 3 3. Those in attendance must be prepared to discuss the claims, defenses and damages. The 4 failure of any counsel, party or authorized person subject to this order to appear in person 5 may result in the imposition of sanctions. In addition, the conference will not proceed and 6 will be reset to another date. 7 4. Parties are directed to submit confidential settlement statements no later than March 17, 8 2020 to dmcorders@caed.uscourts.gov. Parties are also directed to file a “Notice of 9 Submission of Confidential Settlement Statement” (See L.R. 270(d)). Settlement 10 statements should not be filed with the Clerk of the Court nor served on any other 11 party. Settlement statements shall be clearly marked “confidential” with the date and 12 time of the settlement conference indicated prominently thereon. The confidential 13 settlement statement shall be no longer than five pages in length, typed or neatly printed, 14 and include the following: 15 a. A brief statement of the facts of the case. 16 b. A brief statement of the claims and defenses, i.e., statutory or other grounds upon 17 which the claims are founded; a forthright evaluation of the parties’ likelihood of 18 prevailing on the claims and defenses; and a description of the major issues in 19 dispute. 20 c. A summary of the proceedings to date. 21 d. An estimate of the cost and time to be expended for further discovery, pretrial, and 22 1 While the exercise of its authority is subject to abuse of discretion review, “the district court has the authority to 23 order parties, including the federal government, to participate in mandatory settlement conferences… .” United States v. United States District Court for the Northern Mariana Islands, 694 F.3d 1051, 1053, 1057, 1059 (9th Cir. 24 2012)(“the district court has broad authority to compel participation in mandatory settlement conference[s].”). The term “full authority to settle” means that the individuals attending the mediation conference must be authorized to 25 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 26 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. Pitman v. 27 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 28 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). 1 2 trial. 3 e. The relief sought. 4 f. The party’s position on settlement, including present demands and offers and a 5 history of past settlement discussions, offers, and demands. 6 g. A brief statement of each party’s expectations and goals for the settlement 7 conference, including how much a party is willing to accept and/or willing to pay. 8 h. Ifthe parties intend to discuss the joint settlement of any other actions or claims 9 not in this suit, give a brief description of each action or claim as set forth above, 10 including case number(s) if applicable. 11 12 | ITIS SOORDERED 13 | Dated: February 18, 2020 CA rd ht / (g—, CAROLYN K. DELANEY) 15 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 16 17 | i6lavi.186 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28