(PC) Jones v. Pfeiffer ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DYRELL WAYNE JONES, Case No. 1:19-cv-00396-DAD-HBK 12 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DENY PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO FIND 13 v. DEFENDANTS IN BREACH OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT 14 J.WALINGA; ET. AL, FOURTEEN-DAY OBJECTION PERIOD 15 Defendants. (Doc. No. 80) 16 17 Plaintiff Dyrell Wayne Jones is a state prisoner and proceeds pro se and in forma pauperis 18 in this closed civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See Order dated September 10, 19 2021, directing Clerk of Court to close action based upon parties’ notice of voluntary dismissal 20 with prejudice under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41 (a)(1)(A)(ii). (Doc. No. 79). 21 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s “motion to enforce settlement agreement” filed on 22 February 2, 2022, claiming Defendants are in default of the settlement agreement. (Doc. No. 80). 23 Defendants filed an opposition, attaching exhibits and a declaration from attorney Alice M. Segal 24 in support. (Doc. Nos. 82, 82-1). Because the facts demonstrate Plaintiff timely received the 25 settlement funds, the undersigned recommends the District Court deny Plaintiff’s motion. 26 Plaintiff contends that Defendants failed to deposit the settlement funds into his inmate 27 trust account within 180 days from the date Plaintiff delivered the signed settlement agreement 28 and related forms to Defendants, which was a violation of the settlement agreement. (Doc. No. 1 80 at 1). As a result, Plaintiff requests one of three remedies: (1) sanction Defendants $500.00 to 2 be paid to Plaintiff by each Defendant; (2) enforce the settlement agreement; or (3) set aside the 3 settlement and allow Plaintiff to proceed in the action. (Id. at 1-2). 4 In opposition, Defendants state the settlement funds were timely paid to Plaintiff within 5 180 days as evidenced by the proof of payment and confirmation letter defense counsel received 6 from Plaintiff dated February 14, 2022. (Doc. No. 82 at 1) (citing Doc. No. 82-1 at 11-13). 7 Specifically, the case settled after a settlement conference held on August 17, 2021. (Doc. No. 8 75; Doc. No. 82 at 2). The parties had 120 days to file dispositional documents with the Court. 9 (Doc. No. 75). On August 19, 2021, Defendant sent Plaintiff a stipulated notice of voluntary 10 dismissal and Settlement Agreement and Release to execute, both which he executed and returned 11 to Defendants on August 31, 2021. (Doc. No. 82-1 at ¶¶ 3-4). The Defendants then filed the 12 executed stipulation for voluntarily dismissal on September 9, 2021. (Doc. No. (Id.). Thus, 13 dispositional documents were timely filed with the Court within 120 days. 14 Pursuant to the terms of the Settlement and Release, CDCR had 180 days from the date 15 Plaintiff delivered the signed stipulation for voluntary dismissal and Settlement Agreement and 16 Release to Defendant to pay the settlement amount. (Doc. No. 82-1 at 5, ¶4). Thus, Defendant 17 had until Monday, February 28, 2022, to deposit the settlement amount into Plaintiff’s inmate trust 18 fund account. The exhibits submitted by Defendants evidence that CDCR processed payment to 19 Plaintiff on January 3, 2022, and Plaintiff confirmed receipt of the settlement funds by letter dated 20 February 14, 2022, postmarked on February 15, 2022. (Doc. Nos. 82-1 at 9, 11-13). Based upon 21 a review of the docket and the uncontroverted evidence submitted by Defendants, Defendants 22 deposited $2,000.00 into Plaintiff’s inmate trust fund account before the 180 days expired on 23 February 28, 2022,1 and therefore did not breach the settlement agreement. 24 Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED: 25 Plaintiff’s motion to find Defendants in breach of settlement agreement (Doc. No. 80) be 26 27 1 Notably the settlement agreement informed Plaintiff that “CDCR will make a good faith effort to pay the settlement amount (minus any restitution amounts, liens and fees) within 180 days from the date 28 Plaintiff delivers to Defendants a signed settlement agreement.” (Doc. No. 82-1at 5 ¶4) (emphasis added). 1 | DENIED. 2 NOTICE TO THE PARTIES 3 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 4 | assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within fourteen (14) 5 | days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 6 | objections with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate 7 | Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the objections shall be served and 8 | filed within fourteen (14) days after service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure 9 | to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. 10 | Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 11 | 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). 12 Dated: __April 22, 2022 Mihaw. Wh. foareh Zaskth 14 HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28