Brooke v. Regency Hospitality LLC
- Jon Tigar
- 4:19-cv-07506
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Brooke v. Regency Hospitality LLC, Judge Tigar continued the case-management conference and ordered the parties to explain why monetary sanctions should not be imposed.
Theresa Brooke and Regency Hospitality LLC, who were ordered to respond to the court’s order to show cause and attend the continued case-management conference unless the case was otherwise resolved.
What happened
Theresa Brooke v. Regency Hospitality LLC involved a notice of settlement filed by the parties on September 14, 2020. The court had required them to file either a dismissal agreement or a joint explanation if they could not do so by October 30.
Neither the required statement nor a dismissal was filed. The court therefore continued the case-management conference, which had been scheduled for November 17, to December 15, 2020, at 2:00 p.m.
The court also ordered the parties to show cause, with a written response due December 8, why monetary sanctions should not be imposed for disobeying the court’s order. Judge Jon S. Tigar did not impose sanctions in this order.
The detailed version
- Brooke v. Regency Hospitality LLC · No. 4:19-cv-07506
- Jon Tigar
- Nov. 12, 2020
Background
The parties filed a notice of settlement on September 14, 2020. That same day, the court ordered them to file by October 30 either a stipulation of dismissal or a one-page joint statement explaining why they could not file one. The court also set a case-management conference for November 17, which would be automatically vacated if the parties timely filed a stipulation of dismissal.
Court’s Action
The required statement was not filed, and the case had not been dismissed. The court continued the case-management conference to December 15, 2020, at 2:00 p.m.
The court also ordered the parties to show cause—that is, to explain—why monetary sanctions should not be imposed. It stated that federal courts have inherent power to impose monetary sanctions for willful disobedience of a court order after notice and an opportunity to be heard. The parties’ written response was due December 8, 2020.
Disposition
The order continued the case-management conference and issued an order to show cause. It did not impose monetary sanctions or dismiss the case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.