Hardin

Hardin v. Mendocino Coast District Hospital

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaDecember 20, 20194:17-cv-05554California1,510 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 ELLEN HARDIN, Case No. 17-cv-05554-JST

Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

v. DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION TO ENFORCE

MENDOCINO COAST DISTRICT SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT HOSPITAL, et al., Re: ECF No. 295 Defendants.

12 Before the Court is Plaintiff Ellen Hardin’s motion to enforce settlement agreement. ECF No. 295. As discussed below, the Court concludes that the parties have an enforceable settlement agreement, but that the terms of the agreement are contrary to the position set forth in Hardin’s motion. The Court will therefore grant the motion in part and deny it in part. I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff Ellen Hardin brings this employment case, including allegations of retaliation under the federal False Claims Act, against her former employer, Mendocino Coast District Hospital (“MCDH”). She has also named the following individuals as defendants: Bob Edwards, MCDH’s chief executive…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.