UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
September 30, 2010
RE: SEYMOUR, ET AL
GODWIN, ET AL
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Honorable Phyllis D. Hamilton Judge, United States District Court Northern District of California
Telephone 510‐238‐4190 ROBERT J. EVANS Email firstname.lastname@example.org Fax 510‐444‐1704 Attorney at Law 1736 Franklin Street Tenth Floor Oakland, CA 94612
Dear Judge Hamilton:
I am writing concerning the motion to enforce settlement pending in the above matter. The motion was originally filed by defendants, but taken off calendar by the Court when the matter was referred for further settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Laporte. Thereafter, Your Honor vacated that order of reference and set a briefing schedule on defendants' motion.
Plaintiffs' response to the motion was filed electronically yesterday (and Chambers Copies are being delivered today) which included opposition to defendants' motion to enforce an "agreement" to which plaintiffs had never agreed combined with a motion to enforce a settlement to which the parties had agreed. No date was set for plaintiffs' counter-motion because in Your Honor's order of September 15, 2010, it was specified that the matter would be decided on the papers unless, after reviewing the papers, the Court determined a hearing was necessary.
The purpose of this letter is to request that the order of September 15 be modified to make clear that plaintiffs' counter-motion will be determined concurrently with defendants' motion (as was stated in plaintiffs' motion), either with or without a modification of the schedule. (I do not believe a modification is necessary because the existence and enforceability of the settlement agreement which plaintiffs seek to enforce is a basis for their opposition to defendants' motion.)
Thank you for your consideration.
Defendants' opposition due by 10/13/10; Plaintiffs' Very truly yours, reply due by 10/20/10. No hearing will be held.
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.