Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

DEAN v. HAZEWOOD, 2:08-cv-2398 JFM (PC). (2012)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20120627941 Visitors: 16
Filed: Jun. 26, 2012
Latest Update: Jun. 26, 2012
Summary: ORDER JOHN F. MOULDS, Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. On March 5, 2012, the above-captioned case was settled in proceedings before the undersigned and the terms of the settlement were entered on the record in open court. By order filed March 12, 2012, the parties were directed to filed documents disposing of this action no later than one hundred fifty days from the date of the order and were cautioned t
More

ORDER

JOHN F. MOULDS, Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On March 5, 2012, the above-captioned case was settled in proceedings before the undersigned and the terms of the settlement were entered on the record in open court. By order filed March 12, 2012, the parties were directed to filed documents disposing of this action no later than one hundred fifty days from the date of the order and were cautioned that failure to comply with the order might be grounds for the imposition of sanctions on any and all counsel or parties who contributed to the violation of the order.

On March 13, 2012, plaintiff filed a motion for a copy of the transcript of the March 5, 2012 proceedings. Therein, plaintiff represented that he had not yet received the forms from defendants to sign in order to receive the settlement funds.

On March 22, 2012, defendants filed a response to plaintiff's March 13, 2012 motion and to the court's March 12, 2012 order. Therein, counsel for defendants represented that on March 8, 2012, she had sent plaintiff a draft settlement agreement, a payee data form, and a stipulation, and that plaintiff had not, as of the date of the filing, provided any of the required information.

On May 9, 2012, plaintiff filed a request for a copy of the transcript of the March 5, 2012 proceedings. Plaintiff states that he sent a check in the amount of $4.50 to the Clerk of the Court. Court records reflect that plaintiff twice sent a check to the Clerk of the Court for a copy of his pretrial statement, and that both times the Clerk returned the check to plaintiff. No check was included with the May 9, 2012 filing. Due to plaintiff's failure to transmit sufficient funds to purchase a copy of the transcript, his motions will be denied without prejudice.

The settlement reached by the parties provides for defendants to "pay within a reasonable time the sum of $700 to a person of [plaintiff]'s selection." Transcript of Proceedings, March 5, 2012, at 3:21-22. The court expects plaintiff to provide defendants with the identity of the individual and information necessary to transmit payment, and for defendants to transmit that payment, not later than five months from the date of settlement, or by August 3, 2012.

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's March 13, 2012 and May 9, 2012 motions for a copy of the transcript of the March 5, 2012 proceedings is denied without prejudice.

2. Both parties shall take all steps necessary to complete the payment of settlement proceeds to the person identified by plaintiff and to file a stipulation for dismissal of this action not later than August 9, 2012.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer