“the district court has broad authority to compel participation in 23 mandatory settlement conference[s]”
How later courts described this case
- “the district court has broad authority to compel participation in 23 mandatory settlement conference[s]”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
12 LEON BROWN, Case No. 1:21-cv-00808-CDB (PC)
13 Plaintiff, ORDER SETTING SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE AND PROCEDURES
14 v.
Settlement Conference: 11/6/2023 at 8:30
15 R. ESMOND, et al., a.m. before Magistrate Judge Erica P.
Grosjean
16 Defendants.
Confidential Settlement Conference
17 Statement Deadline: 10/30/2023
18
19
20 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with this civil rights action filed pursuant to
21 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Court has determined that this case will benefit from a settlement
22 conference. Therefore, this case will be referred to Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean to conduct
23 a settlement conference at the California State Prison, Corcoran (CSP-COR), 4001 King
24 Avenue, Corcoran, CA 93212 on November 6, 2023 at 8:30 a.m. The Court will issue the
25 necessary transportation order in due course.
26 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
27 1. This case is set for a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean
28 on November 6, 2023 at 8:30 a.m. at CSP-COR.
2 2. A representative with full and unlimited authority to negotiate and enter into a binding
3 settlement on the defendants’ behalf shall attend in person.1 Unless otherwise
4 permitted in advance by the Court, the attorneys who will try the case shall appear at
5 the settlement conference. It is recommended that pertinent evidence to be offered at
6 trial, documents or otherwise, be brought to the settlement conference for presentation
7 to the settlement judge. Neither the settlement conference statements nor
8 communications during the settlement conference with the settlement judge can be
9 used by either party in the trial of this case.
10 3. Those in attendance must be prepared to discuss the claims, defenses and damages.
11 The failure of any counsel, party or authorized person subject to this order to appear in
12 person may result in the imposition of sanctions. In addition, the conference will not
13 proceed and will be reset to another date. Absent permission from the Court, in
14 addition to counsel who will try the case being present, the individual parties shall also
15 be present. In the case of corporate parties, associations or other entities, and
16 insurance carriers, a representative executive with authority to discuss, consider,
17 propose and agree, or disagree, to any settlement proposal or offer shall also be
18 present. A representative with unlimited authority shall either attend in person or be
19 available by phone throughout the conference. In other words, having settlement
20
21 1 While the exercise of its authority is subject to abuse of discretion review, “the district court has
the authority to order parties, including the federal government, to participate in mandatory settlement
22 conferences….” United States v. United States District Court for the Northern Mariana Islands, 694 F.3d
1051, 1053, 1057, 1059 (9th Cir. 2012) (“the district court has broad authority to compel participation in
23 mandatory settlement conference[s]”). 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
24 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
25 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. Brinker
26 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
27 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
28 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 authority “up to a certain amount” is not acceptable. IF ANY PARTY BELIEVES
3 THAT A SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE WOULD BE FUTILE, THEN THAT
4 PARTY SHALL CONTACT THE COURT NOT LATER THAN SEVENTY-
5 TWO HOURS PRECEDING THE SCHEDULED SETTLEMENT
6 CONFERENCE.
7 4. Parties are directed to submit confidential settlement statements no later than October
8 30, 2023 to epgorders@caed.uscourts.gov. Plaintiff shall mail his confidential
9 settlement statement Attn: Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean, USDC CAED, 2500
10 Tulare Street, Room 1501, Fresno, California 93721, so it arrives no later than October
11 30, 2023. The envelope shall be marked “CONFIDENTIAL SETTLEMENT
12 STATEMENT.” Parties are also directed to file a “Notice of Submission of
13 Confidential Settlement Statement” (See L.R. 270(d)).
14
15 Settlement statements should not be filed with the Clerk of the Court nor served on
16 any other party. Settlement statements shall be clearly marked “confidential” with
17 the date and time of the settlement conference indicated prominently thereon.
18
19 The confidential settlement statement shall be no longer than five pages in length,
20 typed or neatly printed, and include the following:
21 a. A brief statement of the facts of the case.
22 b. A brief statement of the claims and defenses, i.e., statutory or other grounds upon
23 which the claims are founded; a forthright evaluation of the parties’ likelihood of
24 prevailing on the claims and defenses; and a description of the major issues in
25 dispute.
26 c. An estimate of the cost and time to be expended for further discovery, pretrial, and
27 trial.
28 d. The party’s position on settlement, including present demands and offers and a
1
2 history of past settlement discussions, offers, and demands.
3 e. A brief statement of the party’s expectations and goals for the settlement
4 conference, including how much the party is willing to accept and/or willing to
5 pay.
6 f. Ifthe parties intend to discuss the joint settlement of any other actions or claims
7 not in this suit, give a brief description of each action or claim as set forth above,
8 including case number(s) if applicable.
9 5. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this order on the Litigation Office
10 at California State Prison, Corcoran, via facsimile at (559) 992-7372 or via email.
11 | IT IS SO ORDERED.
"2 Dated: _ September 21, 2023 | ) Ww Vv R~
13 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28