Filed: Sep. 09, 2016
Latest Update: Sep. 09, 2016
Summary: ORDER (Mot Compel SC — ECF No. 44) PEGGY A. LEEN , Magistrate Judge . Before the court is Plaintiff Jennifer Turner's Motion to Compel a Settlement Conference (ECF No. 44), filed August 15, 2016. The court has reviewed the motion and Defendants' Opposition (ECF No. 49) filed September 1, 2016. Plaintiff requests the court to compel a settlement conference as the parties have discussed the possibility of resolving certain issues. Plaintiff also believes that the parties would benefit from
Summary: ORDER (Mot Compel SC — ECF No. 44) PEGGY A. LEEN , Magistrate Judge . Before the court is Plaintiff Jennifer Turner's Motion to Compel a Settlement Conference (ECF No. 44), filed August 15, 2016. The court has reviewed the motion and Defendants' Opposition (ECF No. 49) filed September 1, 2016. Plaintiff requests the court to compel a settlement conference as the parties have discussed the possibility of resolving certain issues. Plaintiff also believes that the parties would benefit from a..
More
ORDER
(Mot Compel SC — ECF No. 44)
PEGGY A. LEEN, Magistrate Judge.
Before the court is Plaintiff Jennifer Turner's Motion to Compel a Settlement Conference (ECF No. 44), filed August 15, 2016. The court has reviewed the motion and Defendants' Opposition (ECF No. 49) filed September 1, 2016.
Plaintiff requests the court to compel a settlement conference as the parties have discussed the possibility of resolving certain issues. Plaintiff also believes that the parties would benefit from a neutral third party discussing the various issues involved in the case.
Defendants disagree that a settlement conference would be beneficial without the benefit of initial disclosures and at least some discovery. Although Defendants are not opposed to engage in a settlement conference if they are given certain information beforehand, they oppose being compelled to participate in a settlement conference without receiving certain information.
There are a number of motions pending which the district judge initially set for hearing on September 8, which have now been continued for hearing on September 23, 2016. Unless the parties stipulate to an early settlement conference, the district judge automatically refers civil cases to the assigned magistrate judge for a settlement conference after completion of discovery, and after dispositive motions have been decided. The motion indicates that if the case does not settle and dispositive motions are denied substantial attorney's fees and costs will be incurred litigating this case. The court is happy to try to accommodate an early settlement conference if all parties are in agreement and believe a settlement conference would be productive and potentially dispositive of the entire case. However, as all discovery disputes, pre-trial case management and most non-dispositve motions will be decided by me if the case survives after decision of pending dispositive motions, the court will not compel unwilling participation at this stage of the proceedings.
Having reviewed and considered the matter,
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion to Compel a Settlement Conference (ECF No. 44) is DENIED.
