FRAZIER v. BAXTER, 5:13-CV-138-BR. (2015)
Court: District Court, E.D. North Carolina
Number: infdco20150325c74
Visitors: 4
Filed: Mar. 24, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 24, 2015
Summary: ORDER JAMES E. GATES , Magistrate Judge . This case, brought by pro se plaintiff Keith Edward Frazier ("plaintiff"), comes before the court on his motion (D.E. 73) for a settlement conference. Defendant Jerry Seighman ("defendant"), the only remaining defendant, opposes the motion. ( See D.E. 74). The court finds that the record does not presently demonstrate a sufficient likelihood that a settlement conference would be productive to merit the convening of a conference. Aside from defenda
Summary: ORDER JAMES E. GATES , Magistrate Judge . This case, brought by pro se plaintiff Keith Edward Frazier ("plaintiff"), comes before the court on his motion (D.E. 73) for a settlement conference. Defendant Jerry Seighman ("defendant"), the only remaining defendant, opposes the motion. ( See D.E. 74). The court finds that the record does not presently demonstrate a sufficient likelihood that a settlement conference would be productive to merit the convening of a conference. Aside from defendan..
More
ORDER
JAMES E. GATES, Magistrate Judge.
This case, brought by pro se plaintiff Keith Edward Frazier ("plaintiff"), comes before the court on his motion (D.E. 73) for a settlement conference. Defendant Jerry Seighman ("defendant"), the only remaining defendant, opposes the motion. (See D.E. 74).
The court finds that the record does not presently demonstrate a sufficient likelihood that a settlement conference would be productive to merit the convening of a conference. Aside from defendant's opposition, a scheduling order has not yet been entered and therefore no discovery has yet been undertaken. The record does not otherwise justify convening a settlement conference at this this time.
Plaintiff's motion for a court-hosted settlement conference is accordingly DENIED. This denial is without prejudice to either party bringing such a motion in the future after a material change in the circumstances of this case.
SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
