Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-05010/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-05010-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act

---

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

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

EUREKA DIVISION

BARRY DEWAYNE WOODS,

Plaintiff,

v.

JOSHUA R LOPEZ, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 15-cv-05010-WHA (RMI)

ORDER ON MOTION

Re: Dkt. No. 76

In April of 2018, this matter was settled in full, whereby Plaintiff would agree to dismiss 

with prejudice all claims against all Defendants in exchange for the payment of $35,000.00. In 

September of 2018 Plaintiff filed a proposed order compelling the payment of funds (dkt. 73), in 

which Plaintiff asserted that certain monies were improperly deducted from the settlement amount 

prior to being deposited in his account. The court ordered Defendants to investigate and file a 

report regarding the status of the settlement payments. See Order (dkt. 74). On November 2, 2018, 

Defendants filed a report (dkt. 75) which indicated that two separate payments to Plaintiff’s 

account had been made, one of which satisfied Plaintiff’s restitution and other legal obligations,

and the other was deposited into Plaintiff’s trust account. 

Thereafter, Plaintiff filed a Motion “for Defendants Warden and Litigation Coordinator to 

Provide Documentary Explanation for Allocation of Settlement Funding” (dkt. 76). In response to 

the Motion, Defendants filed a detailed breakdown of the accounting and allocation of the 

settlement funds, along with Plaintiff’s inmate statement report. See Def.s’ Resp. (dkt. 78). From 

that detailed accounting, Plaintiff was able to identify an accounting error, wherein Plaintiff was 

made to double pay a court fee to the Monterrey Superior Court. See Pl.’s Reply (dkt. 79). At the 

Case 3:15-cv-05010-WHA Document 88 Filed 03/27/19 Page 1 of 2
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

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

hearing held on February 21, 2019, counsel for Defendants confirmed that Plaintiff was indeed 

double-charged by the Monterrey Superior Court, but that the Superior Court would issue Plaintiff 

a refund. The court further instructed counsel for Defendant to investigate and, if necessary, 

attempt to resolve any further discrepancies with the Monterrey Superior Court’s accounting. On 

March 25, 2019, Defendants filed a detailed status report. See Report (dkt. 87). In the report, 

counsel for Defendants informs that the refund from the Monterrey Superior Court was deposited 

into Plaintiff’s trust account on March 22, 2019. Id. at 2. The report also states that the Monterey 

Superior Court “staff reviewed each of Plaintiff’s cases to determine whether or not the court had 

received any sort of payment for the outstanding fees” and that “no other double-payments or 

over-payments were identified in any of Plaintiff’s other Monterey Superior Court cases.” Id. at 3. 

Accordingly, the court finds that Plaintiff’s Motion “for Defendants Warden and Litigation 

Coordinator to Provide Documentary Explanation for Allocation of Settlement Funding” (dkt. 76) 

is MOOT.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 27, 2019

ROBERT M. ILLMAN

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:15-cv-05010-WHA Document 88 Filed 03/27/19 Page 2 of 2