Martinez v. National EWP, Inc.

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. California
DecidedMay 8, 2023
Docket3:23-cv-00836
StatusUnknown

This text of Martinez v. National EWP, Inc. (Martinez v. National EWP, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Martinez v. National EWP, Inc., (S.D. Cal. 2023).

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MICHAEL MARTINEZ & JUAN Case No.: 23-cv-00836-RSH-JLB SANCHEZ, 12 NOTICE AND ORDER SETTING Plaintiffs, EARLY NEUTRAL EVALUATION 13 AND CASE MANAGEMENT v. 14 CONFERENCES NATIONAL EWP, INC., et al., 15 Defendants. 16

17 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that an Early Neutral Evaluation Conference 18 (“ENE”) will be held by video conference1 on June 12, 2023, at 1:45 PM before Magistrate 19 Judge Jill L. Burkhardt. In the event the case does not settle at the ENE, a Case 20 Management Conference (“CMC”) pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b) is SET for June 12, 21 2023, and will be held at the conclusion of the ENE. 22

23 24 1 If any party believes the ENE is more likely to be successful if conducted in-person, that party shall meet and confer on the issue with the other parties. After meeting and 25 conferring, and no later than 10 days from the date of this Order, the parties shall leave 26 a joint voicemail with chambers at (619) 557-6624 indicating which of the parties requests an in-person ENE. In the voicemail, the parties shall leave three mutually available dates 27 for a telephonic status conference to discuss whether the ENE should be held in-person. 28 The final decision will be made by the Court. 1 The following are mandatory directions for the parties preparing for the ENE. 2 Absent express permission obtained from this Court, and notwithstanding the 3 pendency of any motion, counsel shall timely comply with the dates and deadlines 4 ordered herein. 5 1. Purpose of Conference: The purpose of the ENE is to permit an informal 6 discussion between the attorneys, parties, and the settlement judge of every aspect of the 7 lawsuit in an effort to achieve an early resolution of the case. All ENE discussions will be 8 informal, off the record, privileged, and confidential. Counsel for any non-English 9 speaking parties is responsible for arranging for the appearance of an interpreter at the 10 ENE. The Court generally allots up to three hours for ENEs, but the parties should be 11 prepared to participate longer at the Court’s discretion. 12 2. Appearance by All Parties Required: All parties, adjusters for insured 13 defendants, and other representatives of a party having full settlement authority as 14 explained below, and the principal attorneys responsible for the litigation, must appear at 15 the ENE by video conference and be legally and factually prepared to discuss settlement 16 of the case. Mandatory directions for participating in the ENE by video conference 17 are attached hereto. Counsel appearing without their clients (whether or not counsel has 18 been given settlement authority) will be cause for immediate imposition of sanctions and 19 may also result in the immediate termination of the conference. If each of the principal 20 attorneys responsible for the litigation are not listed on the docket as an “ATTORNEY TO 21 BE NOTICED,” then they each shall enter their appearance on the docket as soon as 22 practicable, but in no event later than 7 calendar days prior to the ENE. 23 The Court will not grant requests to excuse a required party from personally 24 appearing absent extraordinary circumstances. If counsel believes there are sufficient 25 grounds to request that a required party be excused from personally appearing, they must 26 confer with opposing counsel prior to making the request. All requests to excuse a required 27 party from personally appearing must be made by joint or ex parte motion and filed at least 28 1 7 calendar days before the scheduled ENE. Failure to appear at the ENE will be 2 grounds for sanctions. 3 3. Full Settlement Authority Required: In addition to counsel who will try the 4 case, a party or party representative with full settlement authority2 must appear at the ENE. 5 In the case of an entity, an authorized representative of the entity who is not retained outside 6 counsel must be present and must have discretionary authority to commit the entity to pay 7 an amount up to the amount of the Plaintiff’s prayer (excluding punitive damages prayers). 8 The purpose of this requirement is to have representatives present who can settle the case 9 during the course of the ENE without consulting a superior. 10 Counsel for a United States government entity may be excused from this 11 requirement so long as the government attorney who appears at the ENE (1) has primary 12 responsibility for handling the case, and (2) may negotiate settlement offers that the 13 attorney is willing to recommend to the government official having ultimate settlement 14 authority. 15 4. ENE Statements Required: On or before June 5, 2023, the parties shall 16 lodge ENE statements with Judge Burkhardt’s chambers via e-mail at 17 efile_burkhardt@casd.uscourts.gov. Whether these statements are lodged confidentially 18 or whether they are served on opposing counsel is within the parties’ discretion. ENE 19 statements must be 5 pages or less (excluding exhibits) and set forth the following: 20

21 22 2 “Full settlement authority” means that the individuals at the settlement conference must be authorized to explore settlement options fully and to agree at that time to any 23 settlement terms acceptable to the parties. Heileman Brewing Co. v. Joseph Oat Corp., 24 871 F.2d 648, 653 (7th Cir. 1989). The person needs to have “unfettered discretion and authority” to change the settlement position of a party. Pitman v. Brinker Int’l, Inc., 216 25 F.R.D. 481, 485–86 (D. Ariz. 2003). The purpose of requiring a person with unlimited 26 settlement authority to appear at the conference contemplates 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 27 certain of authority is not adequate. See Nick v. Morgan’s Foods, Inc., 270 F.3d 590, 595– 28 97 (8th Cir. 2001). 1 a. The nature of the case, the claims, the defenses, including the statutory 2 or other grounds upon which the claims are founded, and the parties’ positions 3 regarding settlement of the case. 4 b. A specific and current demand or offer addressing all relief or 5 remedies sought. If a specific demand or offer cannot be made at the time the 6 statement is submitted, then the reasons therefor must be stated along with a 7 statement as to when the party will be in a position to state a demand or offer. A 8 general statement that a party will “negotiate in good faith,” “offer a nominal cash 9 sum,” or “be prepared to make an offer at the conference” is not a specific demand 10 or offer. In advance of the ENE, the parties are strongly encouraged to engage in at 11 least one round of settlement demands and offers. ENE statements shall include 12 all settlement proposals exchanged to date. 13 c. A list of: (i) all attorney and non-attorney conference participants 14 for that side, including the name(s) and title(s)/position(s) of the party/party 15 representative(s) who will appear and have settlement authority at the conference; 16 (ii) an e-mail address for each participant to receive the Zoom video conference 17 invitation; and (iii) a telephone number where each participant may be reached so 18 that if technical difficulties arise, the Court will be in a position to proceed 19 telephonically instead of by video conference.3 20 5. Submission of Magistrate Judge Consent Form: No later than May 22, 21 2023, each party shall provide Plaintiff’s counsel with an executed copy of the attached 22 consent form, titled Notice, Consent, and Reference of a Civil Action to a Magistrate Judge.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Martinez v. National EWP, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martinez-v-national-ewp-inc-casd-2023.