Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_09-cv-01734/USCOURTS-casd-3_09-cv-01734-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 15:1601 Truth in Lending

---

MINUTES OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CARRILLO v. COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS, INC. ET AL. No. 09-CV-1734-BTM(WVG)

HON. WILLIAM V. GALLO CT. DEPUTY J. YAHL RPTR. 

Attorneys

Plaintiffs Defendants

 

Plaintiffs’ counsel has represented to the Court that this case has nearly

settled. In order to further accommodate the parties’ efforts to settle

this matter, the Settlement Conference currently on calendar for November

19, 2010 at 2:00 P.M. is vacated and rescheduled to January 28, 2011 at

2:00 P.M. in Courtroom F. Further, the parties shall submit directly to

chambers a joint status update of the progress of settlement no later than

December 8, 2010. It shall be sufficient to submit said update to the

undersigned’s e-file mailbox.

All parties or their representatives who have full authority to enter into

a binding settlement, in addition to the attorneys participating in the

litigation, shall be present at the conference.

Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 16.3, all party representatives and claims

adjusters for insured defendants with full and unlimited authority to

negotiate and enter into a binding settlement, as well as the principal

attorney(s) responsible for the litigation, must be present and legally and

factually prepared to discuss and resolve the case at the mandatory

settlement conference. Retained outside corporate counsel shall not appear

on behalf of a corporation as the party who has the authority to negotiate

and enter into a settlement. 

"Full authority to settle" means that the individuals at the settlement

conference must be authorized to fully explore settlement options and to

agree at that time to any settlement terms acceptable to the parties.

Heileman Brewing Co., Inc. v. Joseph Oat Corp., 871 F.2d 648 (7th Cir.

1989). The person needs to have "unfettered discretion and authority" to

change the settlement position of a party. Pitman v. Brinker Intl., Inc.,

216 F.R.D. 481, 485-486 (D. Ariz. 2003). The purpose of requiring a person

with unlimited settlement authority to attend the conference includes that

the person's view of the case may be altered during the face to face

conference. Id. at 486. A limited or a sum certain of authority is not

adequate. Nick v. Morgan's Foods, Inc., 270 F.3d 590 (8th Cir. 2001).

DATED: November 16, 2010

 Hon. William V. Gallo

 U.S. Magistrate Judge

Case 3:09-cv-01734-BTM-WVG Document 22 Filed 11/16/10 Page 1 of 1