BUCHANAN v. SANTOS, 1:08-cv-01174-AWI-GSA-PC. (2012)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20120508574
Visitors: 14
Filed: May 07, 2012
Latest Update: May 07, 2012
Summary: ORDER REQUIRING PARTIES TO NOTIFY COURT WHETHER A SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE WOULD BE BENEFICIAL THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE GARY S. AUSTIN, Magistrate Judge. I. BACKGROUND Whittier Buchanan ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. This action now proceeds on Plaintiff's original Complaint, filed on August 11, 2008, against defendant Correctional Officer A. Santos ("Defendant"), for use of excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amen
Summary: ORDER REQUIRING PARTIES TO NOTIFY COURT WHETHER A SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE WOULD BE BENEFICIAL THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE GARY S. AUSTIN, Magistrate Judge. I. BACKGROUND Whittier Buchanan ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. This action now proceeds on Plaintiff's original Complaint, filed on August 11, 2008, against defendant Correctional Officer A. Santos ("Defendant"), for use of excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amend..
More
ORDER REQUIRING PARTIES TO NOTIFY COURT WHETHER A SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE WOULD BE BENEFICIAL
THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE
GARY S. AUSTIN, Magistrate Judge.
I. BACKGROUND
Whittier Buchanan ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action now proceeds on Plaintiff's original Complaint, filed on August 11, 2008, against defendant Correctional Officer A. Santos ("Defendant"), for use of excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment. (Doc. 1.) This case is scheduled for jury trial on September 25, 2012 before District Judge Anthony W. Ishii.
II. SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE
The Court is able to refer cases for mediation before a participating United States Magistrate Judge. Settlement conferences are ordinarily held in person at the Court or at a prison in the Eastern District of California. Plaintiff and Defendant shall notify the Court whether they believe, in good faith, that settlement in this case is a possibility and whether they are interested in having a settlement conference scheduled by the Court.1
Defendant's counsel shall notify the Court whether there are security concerns that would prohibit scheduling a settlement conference. If security concerns exist, counsel shall notify the Court whether those concerns can be adequately addressed if Plaintiff is transferred for settlement only and then returned to prison for housing.
III. CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff and Defendant shall file a written response to this order.2
IT IS SO ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. The parties may wish to discuss the issue by telephone in determining whether they believe settlement is feasible.
2. The issuance of this order does not guarantee referral for settlement, but the Court will make every reasonable attempt to secure the referral should both parties desire a settlement conference. If the case is referred for settlement, the case will be stayed by order pending completion of the settlement conference.
Source: Leagle
