Filed: Dec. 30, 2014
Latest Update: Dec. 30, 2014
Summary: ORDER KENDALL J. NEWMAN, Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding through counsel. 1 By stipulation and order, this action was terminated on June 30, 2014. (ECF No. 37.) On October 10, 2014, plaintiff filed a pro se request for court order, seeking to contest an issue allegedly resolved by the settlement in this action. (ECF No. 38.) On November 14, 2014, plaintiff's pro se motion was denied, and plaintiff was instructed that if he was seeking to enforce or modify the settle
Summary: ORDER KENDALL J. NEWMAN, Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding through counsel. 1 By stipulation and order, this action was terminated on June 30, 2014. (ECF No. 37.) On October 10, 2014, plaintiff filed a pro se request for court order, seeking to contest an issue allegedly resolved by the settlement in this action. (ECF No. 38.) On November 14, 2014, plaintiff's pro se motion was denied, and plaintiff was instructed that if he was seeking to enforce or modify the settlem..
More
ORDER
KENDALL J. NEWMAN, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding through counsel.1 By stipulation and order, this action was terminated on June 30, 2014. (ECF No. 37.) On October 10, 2014, plaintiff filed a pro se request for court order, seeking to contest an issue allegedly resolved by the settlement in this action. (ECF No. 38.) On November 14, 2014, plaintiff's pro se motion was denied, and plaintiff was instructed that if he was seeking to enforce or modify the settlement, he must file such motion before the settlement judge, and it must be filed through counsel.
On December 10, 2014, plaintiff filed a pro se document entitled, "Modify the settlement," in which he claims that he feels that the settlement agreement was breached because during the settlement conference he requested from the court, "could he have this 115 removed from his C-files," and after he returned to prison, he filed a 602 appeal seeking to have the 115 removed, but his 602 appeals were denied. (ECF No. 40 at 1-2.) Plaintiff claims that he has attempted to contact counsel "with no luck." (ECF No. 40 at 2.) Plaintiff asks the court to contact plaintiff's attorney to either modify the settlement and file a writ or prepare for trial. (ECF No. 40 at 2.)
Typically such motions are referred to the settlement judge. However, the undersigned has reviewed the settlement placed on the record by Judge Thurston on June 19, 2014. When the settlement was placed on the record, plaintiff specifically asked whether the 115 would be "pulled from" plaintiff's files, and the settlement judge explained that it would not, because plaintiff's case concerned plaintiff 602 appeal, and did not directly challenge the 115. Plaintiff responded by stating, "Okay." (Id.) Because the record makes clear that the settlement in this action did not include the removal of the 115 from plaintiff's prison files, plaintiff's motion is denied. Moreover, because counsel was only appointed to represent plaintiff in connection with his 602 challenge, no further action by counsel is required.2
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion (ECF No. 40) is denied.
