From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ruflin v. Salt Lake City Corp.

United States District Court, D. Utah, Central Division
Jun 18, 2004
Case No. 2:01CV176 DAK (D. Utah Jun. 18, 2004)

Opinion

Case No. 2:01CV176 DAK.

June 18, 2004


ORDER DISMISSING SALT LAKE COUNTY


This matter is before the court on Salt Lake County's Motion to Enforce Settlement and for Interpleader. Plaintiff has not opposed this motion, and the time for doing so has expired.

Plaintiff filed this case on March 14, 2001. Plaintiff has continued this matter numerous times over the past three years based on his physical and mental conditions and his criminal case. The County made a settlement offer on April 25, 2003. Plaintiff's counsel, on behalf of his client, accepted the settlement offer. The County's counsel prepared a letter and release embodying the terms of the settlement agreement. On June 10, 2003, the County prepared a release for Leon Ruflin, the anticipated court-appointed conservator, to execute the release. The County also sent reminder letters to reminded Plaintiff's counsel on June 27, 2003, October 6, 2003, December 2, 2003, January 28, 2004, and February 11, 2004. On February 23, 2004, the County advised the court of the settlement. On March 17, 2004, Plaintiff's counsel, at a status conference, represented to the court that a hearing had been set in state court to appoint one or both of Plaintiff's parents as guardians. Apparently, however, neither Plaintiff nor his counsel has fulfilled the terms of the settlement agreement by securing court approval of a conservator, executing the release, and filing the motion and order of dismissal with the court.

The court agrees with the County that the settlement agreement must be enforced. The correspondence confirms that he parties reached a settlement as to the amount and the terms of the agreement. There is no evidence that a dispute exists regarding whether a settlement was reached. The County has fulfilled its obligations under the agreement by depositing the agreed-upon funds in the court's registry.

Accordingly, the County's Motion to Enforce Settlement and for Interpleader [docket # 35] is GRANTED. All of Plaintiff's claims against the County are hereby DISMISSED with prejudice. Once a guardian is appointed, Plaintiff may file a motion and proposed order with the court, requesting release of the funds deposited by the County in the amount of $500. Failure to file such a motion by December 20, 2004 will result in the forfeiture of the funds by Plaintiff, and the court will order that the funds be returned to the County.


Summaries of

Ruflin v. Salt Lake City Corp.

United States District Court, D. Utah, Central Division
Jun 18, 2004
Case No. 2:01CV176 DAK (D. Utah Jun. 18, 2004)
Case details for

Ruflin v. Salt Lake City Corp.

Case Details

Full title:TIMOTHY RUFLIN, Plaintiff, v. SALT LAKE CITY CORP.; CHARLES DINSE, Chief…

Court:United States District Court, D. Utah, Central Division

Date published: Jun 18, 2004

Citations

Case No. 2:01CV176 DAK (D. Utah Jun. 18, 2004)