Spikes v. Rosam, LLC
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- William v. Gallo (author)
Analysis
The court considered a joint motion to continue the Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE) and status conference in an ADA premises liability case. The court granted the motion, vacated the prior scheduling order, and reset the ENE for January 6, 2020, while imposing specific pre-conference obligations and a discovery stay.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Joint motion to continue the Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE) and status conference is granted.“For good cause shown, the joint motion to continue the Early Neutral Evaluation (“ENE”) and status conference is GRANTED.” | agree with court The court found 'good cause shown' for the continuance. While the specific facts constituting good cause are not detailed in the order, granting a joint motion to continue a scheduling event is a standard exercise of judicial discretion under Rule 16(b) and Local Rules, provided it does not prejudice the parties or the court's docket. The order resets the dates, which is the logical consequence of granting the motion. |
The Court’s prior Order (Doc. No. 4) is vacated and dates are reset.“The Court’s prior Order (Doc. No. 4) is VACATED, and the dates are reset as set forth below.” | agree with court Vacating the prior order is necessary to effectuate the continuance granted in the preceding sentence. This is a procedural mechanism to update the case schedule. |
An Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE) is scheduled for January 6, 2020, and a telephonic status conference is scheduled for January 3, 2020.“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that an ENE of your case will be held on January 6, 2020, at 9:00 a.m... Additionally, on January 3, 2020, beginning at 1:00 p.m., the Court will hold an attorneys-only telephonic status conference...” | agree with court The court is exercising its inherent authority and Local Rule 16.1 authority to manage the case and schedule conferences. The specific dates and times are within the court's discretion. |
Formal discovery is stayed until the completion of the ENE Conference.“All formal discovery shall be stayed in this case until the completion of the ENE Conference set herein;” | agree with court Courts frequently stay discovery to encourage settlement or to prevent unnecessary litigation costs before a neutral evaluation. This is a common and permissible case management order under Rule 16(b). |
The order itself: sound — The order is a standard case management and scheduling order. It correctly applies Local Rule 16.1(c) regarding the attendance of parties with settlement authority. The citations to Heileman and Pitman are appropriate for defining the scope of 'full authority to settle.' The stay of discovery and the specific pre-conference requirements (meet and confer, joint statement) are reasonable and common in ADA cases to promote resolution. The reasoning is sufficient for a procedural order of this nature.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KAREL SPIKES, Case No.: 19-CV-1604-MMA(WVG)
12 Plaintiff, AMENDED NOTICE AND ORDER 13 v. FOR (1) EARLY NEUTRAL EVALUATION CONFERENCE AND 14 ROSAM, LLC et al., (2) TELEPHONIC STATUS 15 Defendants. CONFERENCE 16 [Doc. No. 7.] 17 18 19 20 For good cause shown, the joint motion to continue the Early Neutral Evaluation 21 (“ENE”) and status conference is GRANTED. The Court’s prior Order (Doc. No. 4) is 22 VACATED, and the dates are reset as set forth below. 23 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that an ENE of your case will be held on January 6, 24 2020, at 9:00 a.m., before United States Magistrate Judge William V. Gallo, Edward J. 25 Schwartz U.S. Courthouse, 221 West Broadway, Second Floor, San Diego, California. The 26 attorneys and parties are to alert chambers of their arrival via the call button in the second- 27 floor elevator lobby. 28 / / / 1 Additionally, on January 3, 2020, beginning at 1:00 p.m., the Court will hold an 2 attorneys-only telephonic status conference with each party separately.1 The purpose of 3 this confidential, off-the-record teleconference is for the Court’s benefit in assessing each 4 party’s concerns, challenges, and whether the Court can assist in alleviating these. On or 5 before December 30, 2019, each attorney intending to participate shall lodge, via 6 electronic mail addressed to efile_Gallo@casd.uscourts.gov, (1) the name of each attorney 7 who will participate and (2) a telephone number at which each attorney may be reached 8 directly without fail at the time of the conference. 9 The following are mandatory guidelines for the parties preparing for the ENE 10 Conference. 11 Pursuant to Rule 16.1(c) of the Local Rules of the United States District Court for 12 the Southern District of California, both counsel and the parties who have full and 13 unlimited authority2 to negotiate and enter into a binding settlement shall appear in person 14 at the conference and shall be prepared to discuss the claims, defenses and damages. 15 Unless there are extraordinary circumstances, persons required to attend the 16 conference pursuant to this Order shall not be excused from personal attendance. Requests 17 to be excused from attendance for extraordinary circumstances shall be made in writing 18 at least seven calendar days prior to the conference. Where the suit involves the United 19 20 21 1 The Court will contact the first party and proceed to contact the remaining parties one at a time. Each call may be short or lengthy. Counsel are required to be available for the 22 Court’s call beginning at the appointed time and remain available until they are called. 23 2 “Full authority to settle” means that the individuals at the settlement conference must be authorized to fully explore settlement options and to agree at that time to any settlement 24 terms acceptable to the parties. Heileman Brewing Co., Inc. v. Joseph Oat Corp., 871 F.2d 25 648 (7th Cir. 1989). The person needs to have “unfettered discretion and authority” to change the settlement position of a party. Pitman v. Brinker Intl., Inc., 216 F.R.D. 481, 26 485-486 (D. Ariz. 2003). The purpose of requiring a person with unlimited settlement 27 authority to attend the conference includes that the person’s view of the case may be altered during the face to face conference. Id. at 486. A limited or a sum certain of authority is 28 1 States or one of its agencies, only counsel for the United States with full settlement 2 authority need appear. All conference discussions will be informal, off the record, 3 privileged and confidential. 4 Based upon the Court’s familiarity with these matters and in the interest of 5 promoting the just, efficient and economical determination of this action, the Court issues 6 the following orders at this time: 7 1. All formal discovery shall be stayed in this case until the completion of the 8 ENE Conference set herein; 9 2. Plaintiff was previously ordered to complete the following by November 18, 10 2019 (Plaintiff has complied): Plaintiff’s counsel shall lodge with Magistrate Judge 11 Gallo’s chambers, and serve on opposing counsel, a statement, not in excess of five pages, 12 including: 13 a. An itemized list of the specific issues on the subject premises which are 14 the basis of the claimed violations under the Americans with 15 Disabilities Act; 16 b. A statement of the amount and category of damages claimed by 17 Plaintiff in this action; 18 c. The amount claimed for attorney’s fees and costs; and, 19 d. The Plaintiff’s demand for settlement of the case in its entirety. 20 3. The parties were previously ordered to complete the following by November 21 23, 2019 (if the parties have not completed this meeting, they shall do so immediately): 22 counsel for the parties as well as property managers of commercial locations shall meet 23 and confer in person at the subject premises regarding settlement of (1) alleged premise 24 violations, and (2) damages, costs and attorney fee claims. Plaintiff’s counsel shall be 25 responsible to make arrangements for the conference. The meet and confer obligation 26 cannot be satisfied by telephone or by the exchange of letters. 27 4. No later than December 30, 2019, counsel shall lodge with Magistrate Judge 28 Gallo’s chambers a joint statement of no more than 10 pages, advising the Court of the 1 || status of settlement negotiations and setting forth all issues in dispute, including property 2 ||issues, Plaintiff’s alleged damages, and the claim for attorney’s fees and costs, along with 3 ||a description of any settlement demands and/or offers exchanged. In the joint statement, 4 || Defendant shall also discuss what steps, if any, Defendant has taken to remedy the alleged 5 || violations set forth in Plaintiff's Complaint. 6 5. At the ENE Conference, Plaintiff’s counsel shall provide documentation to 7 Court for in camera review supporting the amount of attorney’s fees and costs claimed. 8 The parties shall be prepared to engage in good faith settlement discussions with the 9 ||Court and opposing parties during the ENE Conference. Failure to engage in good faith 10 settlement discussions, or to comply with any provision of this Order, may result in the 11 ||imposition of sanctions. 12 Questions regarding this case may be directed to the Magistrate Judge’s Research 13 || Attorney at (619) 557-6384. 14 IT IS SO ORDERED. 15 || DATED: December 5, 2019 Se 16 U7 Hon. William V. Gallo United States Magistrate Judge 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28