Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05466/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05466-37/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DONALD GLASS , Case No. 1:04-cv-5466-OWW-SMS PC

Plaintiff, ORDER SETTING SETTLEMENT 

CONFERENCE

vs.

Date: May 4, 2010

R. BEER, et al., Time: 10:00 a.m.

Courtroom: Nine

Defendants. Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck

 /

Plaintiff is a prisoner proceeding pro se with an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This case

is referred to Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck, to conduct a settlement conference on May 4,

2010, at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom #9 . A separate writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum to

transport the plaintiff from Kern Valley State Prison (KVSP) will issue concurrently herewith. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. This case is set for settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Dennis L.

Beck, on May 4, 2010, at 10:00 a.m. at the U.S. District Court, 2500 Tulare Street, Fresno,

California, in courtroom number 9.

2. Plaintiff shall attend in person, with defendants’ lead counsel and a person

with full and unlimited authority to negotiate and enter into a binding settlement on defendants’

behalf. Those in attendance must be prepared to discuss the claims, defenses and damages. 

1

Case 1:04-cv-05466-OWW -SMS Document 220 Filed 04/22/10 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

Governmental entities may appear through litigation counsel only, but must have immediate

access to the individual with settlement authority. The failure of any counsel, party or 1

authorized person subject to this order to appear in person may result in the imposition of

sanctions. 

3. The parties are directed to submit brief confidential settlement conference

statements to the chambers of Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck so that they are received no later

than April 29, 2010. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 21, 2010 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

The term “full authority to settle” means that the individuals attending the mediation 1

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). The individual must also have “unfettered discretion and

authority” to change the settlement position of the party. Pittman v. Brinker Int’l., Inc., 216

F.R.D. 481, 485-86 (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 at 486. An authorization to settle for a limited dollar amount or sum

certain is not adequate. Nick v. Morgan’s Foods, Inc., 270 F. 3d 590, 596-97 (8th Cir. 2001)

2

Case 1:04-cv-05466-OWW -SMS Document 220 Filed 04/22/10 Page 2 of 2