## Facts

- Donn W. Olson, a pharmacist, sued his former employer, Alick’s Drugs, Inc., in federal court alleging wrongful termination based on disability and age discrimination.
- Olson initially proceeded pro se, later retained counsel, and the case progressed toward trial.
- The court ordered a settlement conference for November 12, 1999; Olson’s counsel agreed to the conference without first obtaining Olson’s consent.
- Olson refused to attend the settlement conference, citing work obligations; counsel did not promptly notify the court or opposing counsel of Olson’s refusal and inability to attend.
- Olson’s attorneys moved to withdraw; the district court permitted withdrawal and directed Olson to appear personally or through new counsel at a pretrial conference on November 30, 1999, while deferring a decision on Olson’s request to continue trial.
- On November 30, Olson arrived approximately five to ten minutes late to the pretrial conference after being delayed at work; defense counsel asserted Olson’s prior communication suggested no one would appear.
- Before Olson arrived, the district court dismissed the action as a sanction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(f).
- Olson promptly sent a letter explaining his absence from the settlement conference and his brief tardiness, and moved to set aside the dismissal; the district court treated the motion as seeking relief under Rule 60(b) and denied it.

## Issues

1. Whether the district court abused its discretion by dismissing the case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(f) for failure to comply with court-ordered pretrial proceedings.
2. Whether the district court abused its discretion in denying relief from judgment under Rule 60(b) based on claimed mistake or excusable neglect.

## Decision

- The Seventh Circuit affirmed the dismissal under Rule 16(f).
- The Seventh Circuit affirmed the denial of Rule 60(b) relief.
- The court held the district court acted within its discretion in sanctioning Olson for noncompliance with pretrial orders, including refusal to attend a court-ordered settlement conference and failure to appear on time for a pretrial conference.
- The court held Olson failed to make a sufficient showing of excusable neglect warranting relief from judgment.
- Any factual misunderstanding by the district court about the defendant’s position on a continuance did not require reversal because the sanction rested on Olson’s conduct and the court’s case-management authority.

## Legal Principles

- Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(f) authorizes sanctions, including dismissal, for failure to appear at a scheduling or pretrial conference or failure to obey a pretrial order.
- Dismissal as a Rule 16(f) sanction is reviewed for abuse of discretion, with substantial deference to the district court’s management of pretrial proceedings.
- Relief from judgment under Rule 60(b) requires a persuasive showing of grounds such as mistake or excusable neglect and is reviewed for abuse of discretion.
- A party’s repeated or deliberate noncompliance with court-ordered pretrial procedures may justify dismissal, and post-judgment explanations that do not establish excusable neglect will not compel reinstatement.

## Conclusion

The Seventh Circuit upheld dismissal of Olson’s discrimination suit because his refusal to attend a court-ordered settlement conference and late arrival at a pretrial conference supported sanctions under Rule 16(f), and his post-judgment showing did not justify the extraordinary remedy of Rule 60(b) relief.


Olson v. Alick, 234 F.3d 1273 (7th Cir. 2000)