Ortiz v. Alvarez

Full title: SANDRA ORTIZ, et al., Plaintiffs, v. GERARDO ALVAREZ, et al., Defendants.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Jul 17, 2018

No. 1:15-cv-00535-DAD-EPG (E.D. Cal. Jul. 17, 2018)

Opinion

No. 1:15-cv-00535-DAD-EPG

07-17-2018

SANDRA ORTIZ, et al., Plaintiffs, v. GERARDO ALVAREZ, et al., Defendants.

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO ENFORCE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND DENYING DEFENDANTS' REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS AS TO RAUL VILLANUEVA

(Doc. Nos. 161, 166)

On January 10, 2018, defendants Parlier Unified School District and Gerardo Alvarez (collectively, the "District Defendants") moved to enforce a settlement agreement with plaintiff Raul Villanueva and requested the award of monetary sanctions in the amount of $4,891.50. (Doc. No. 161). The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Rule 302.

On April 3, 2018, the magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations recommending that the motion to enforce the settlement agreement be granted, the motion for sanctions be denied, Plaintiff Villanueva be compelled to execute a release in accordance with his oral agreement as expressed in open court, and that Villanueva's claims against the District Defendants be dismissed with prejudice. (Doc. No. 166). The parties were provided an opportunity to file objections to the findings and recommendations within fourteen days. The fourteen-day period has expired, and no objections were filed.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Rule 302, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis.

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The District Defendants' motion to enforce the settlement agreement (Doc. No. 161) is GRANTED;

2. The District Defendants' request for imposition of sanctions against Plaintiff Villanueva (Doc. No. 161) is DENIED;

3. Plaintiff Villanueva is directed to execute a release in accordance with his oral agreement as stated by him in open court; and

4. Plaintiff Villanueva's claims against the District Defendants are dismissed with prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 17 , 2018

/s/_________

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE