Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Heilman v. Sanchez, 2:10-cv-1120 JAM DB P. (2018)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20181105c78 Visitors: 5
Filed: Nov. 02, 2018
Latest Update: Nov. 02, 2018
Summary: ORDER DEBORAH BARNES , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. On October 19, 2018, plaintiff filed a motion to stay the proceedings in this matter. (ECF No. 152). For the reasons stated below, the court will deny the motion as moot. The court will also order defense counsel to inform the court of the status of this action and of the related settlement agreement. The record indicates t
More

ORDER

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On October 19, 2018, plaintiff filed a motion to stay the proceedings in this matter. (ECF No. 152). For the reasons stated below, the court will deny the motion as moot. The court will also order defense counsel to inform the court of the status of this action and of the related settlement agreement.

The record indicates that on May 23, 2018, defendant filed a notice of settlement of this action along with a declaration from defense counsel in support of the notice. (See ECF Nos. 146, 146-1). In the declaration, defense counsel stated the following:

Counsel for Defendant Sanchez may be unable to file the required documents disposing of this action within the twenty-one days as required under Local Rule 160(b) because Plaintiff Heilman and his counsel of record have not returned the signed settlement documents, including the settlement agreement and voluntary dismissal with prejudice this case. Additionally, the Southern District Court's transcription for the April 12, 2018 settlement conference from Heilman v. A. Silva, et al., was only just posted on May 21, 2018, and therefore, Defendant Sanchez filed this notice of settlement as soon as practicable after the transcript became available for review. The transcript will be under review by the parties until June 21, 2018.

(ECF No. 146-1 at 2) (internal citations omitted).

Since the filing of the above-referenced notice of settlement and accompanying declaration, defense counsel has not filed any other pleadings in this matter. The court presumes that this matter is proceeding towards settlement as planned. For this reason, the court will deny plaintiff's motion to stay (ECF No. 152) as improperly before this court and moot. At the same time, given the extensive amount of time that has passed since defense counsel's last communication with the court and the absence of an indication that the case has in fact settled, the court will also direct counsel for defendant Sanchez to inform the court regarding the status of this action and of the related settlement agreement.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's motion to stay filed October 19, 2018 (ECF No. 152) is DENIED as improperly before this court and moot, and

2. Within seven days of the date of this order, counsel for defendant Sanchez shall inform the court of the status of this action and of the related settlement agreement.

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