In Chaichian v. Sentinel Ins. Co., No. 1:16-cv-1026, 2017 WL 4891534 (W.D. Ark. October 30, 2017) (Hickey, United States District Judge), the pro se plaintiff signed a "confidential release" in settlement, was tendered a check to fund the settlement, and also received a sealed notice of dismissal of her case, with prejudice, prepared by the defendants' lawyers.
To say again, the release which the pro se plaintiff signed is under wraps. It is sealed from public view. That release apparently contains the terms of the settlement agreement. Still, it is sealed.
To say again also, the defendants' attorneys prepared a notice of dismissal with prejudice for the pro se plaintiff to sign. It is also under wraps. It too is sealed.
After all that, the plaintiff balked at these proceedings. She had the apparent temerity (even gall!) to say that the defendants' lawyers promised to pay her more money than what was in the check.
So, she filed a motion to enforce the settlement. Her motion was denied.
The defendants filed a motion to enforce what they said was the settlement, and they filed their motion under seal away from public view. Their motion was granted.
And the defendants also filed a motion to strike the plaintiff's motion to enforce the settlement. It too was secret. It too was granted.
All this was reported yesterday on Insurance Claims and Issues Blog as it came before the U.S. Magistrate Judge. His report and recommendations were adopted "in toto," as the U.S. District Judge put it.
However, the District Judge made it clear that her ruling and the magistrate's report and recommendations were based on evidence only they and the parties (presumably including the pro se plaintiff) had ever seen:
Judge Bryant’s Report and Recommendation concludes that this case should be dismissed with prejudice. Judge Bryant bases this recommendation on a review of the settlement documents, filed with the Court under seal, which do not reference an additional settlement payment.
(Emphasis supplied.) We have their words to take for what was in the settlement documents, I suppose, since they were filed with the Court under seal as the District Judge said.
But in truth we have more than that. The U.S. Constitution requires that when evidence is used by a judge to make a ruling against someone, then that evidence must be open to the public.
There is another reason which does not necessarily come from the Constitution. It comes from reality. In reality, it is the public that pays for the court system with their federal tax dollars; private wealthy litigants do not fund it.
In the meantime, federal magistrates and federal judges make rulings using secret evidence, and not just in this case.
Dennis Wall is currently at work on his fifth book, which will address how concealed evidence and secret settlements take our money, foreclose on our homes, and change our lives.
Please Read The Disclaimer. ©2017 by Dennis J. Wall. All Rights Reserved.
Comments