Bryant v. Colorado Grill Fresno, Inc., 1:17-cv-01266-SAB. (2018)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20180220f09
Visitors: 27
Filed: Feb. 16, 2018
Latest Update: Feb. 16, 2018
Summary: ORDER REQUIRING PARTIES TO FILE A JOINT REPORT EXPLAINING WHY THE COURT SHOULD RETAIN JURISDICTION OVER SETTLEMENT (ECF No. 27) RESPONSE DUE: FEBRUARY 23, 2018 STANLEY A. BOONE , Magistrate Judge . On September 21, 2017, Plaintiff Rachel Bryant filed this action alleging denial of right of access under the Americans with Disabilities Act. During a scheduling conference on February 6, 2018, the parties advised the Court that the matter had been conditionally settled. On February 16, 2018, t
Summary: ORDER REQUIRING PARTIES TO FILE A JOINT REPORT EXPLAINING WHY THE COURT SHOULD RETAIN JURISDICTION OVER SETTLEMENT (ECF No. 27) RESPONSE DUE: FEBRUARY 23, 2018 STANLEY A. BOONE , Magistrate Judge . On September 21, 2017, Plaintiff Rachel Bryant filed this action alleging denial of right of access under the Americans with Disabilities Act. During a scheduling conference on February 6, 2018, the parties advised the Court that the matter had been conditionally settled. On February 16, 2018, th..
More
ORDER REQUIRING PARTIES TO FILE A JOINT REPORT EXPLAINING WHY THE COURT SHOULD RETAIN JURISDICTION OVER SETTLEMENT (ECF No. 27) RESPONSE DUE: FEBRUARY 23, 2018
STANLEY A. BOONE, Magistrate Judge.
On September 21, 2017, Plaintiff Rachel Bryant filed this action alleging denial of right of access under the Americans with Disabilities Act. During a scheduling conference on February 6, 2018, the parties advised the Court that the matter had been conditionally settled.
On February 16, 2018, the parties filed a stipulation for dismissal of the action with prejudice. (ECF No. 27.) The parties request that the Court retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of their settlement agreement, but do not explain why. Since it is rare that the Court retain jurisdiction, it is unclear why the Court would retain jurisdiction over the settlement contract and any breach of that contract when the settlement was not reached at a settlement conference that the Court conducted. Additionally, the parties should address how long the Court would be expected to retain jurisdiction.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the parties shall file a joint report on or before February 23, 2018, explaining why the Court should retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the settlement agreement.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
