Negrete v. Freedom Mortgage Corporation, 2:19-cv-04784-MWF-SS. (2019)
Court: District Court, C.D. California
Number: infdco20190715547
Visitors: 9
Filed: Jul. 11, 2019
Latest Update: Jul. 11, 2019
Summary: ORDER APPROVING STIPULATION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT WITH PREJUDICE PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) [No Hearing Required] State Court Case No. 56-2019-00527138-CU-OR-VTA Action Filed: April 8, 2019 Trial Date: NA MICHAEL W. FITZGERALD , District Judge . The Court having considered the Stipulation to Dismiss Action With Prejudice Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) (the "Stipulation" ) entered into by and between plaintiffs Jose Lopez Ne
Summary: ORDER APPROVING STIPULATION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT WITH PREJUDICE PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) [No Hearing Required] State Court Case No. 56-2019-00527138-CU-OR-VTA Action Filed: April 8, 2019 Trial Date: NA MICHAEL W. FITZGERALD , District Judge . The Court having considered the Stipulation to Dismiss Action With Prejudice Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) (the "Stipulation" ) entered into by and between plaintiffs Jose Lopez Neg..
More
ORDER APPROVING STIPULATION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT WITH PREJUDICE PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 41(a)(1)(A)(ii)
[No Hearing Required]
State Court Case No. 56-2019-00527138-CU-OR-VTA Action Filed: April 8, 2019 Trial Date: NA
MICHAEL W. FITZGERALD, District Judge.
The Court having considered the Stipulation to Dismiss Action With Prejudice Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) (the "Stipulation") entered into by and between plaintiffs Jose Lopez Negrete and Marissa Negrete and defendant Freedom Mortgage Corporation (collectively, the "Parties"), and good cause appearing therefor,
IT IS ORDERED that the Stipulation is APPROVED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is hereby dismissed as to all parties with prejudice.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all hearings currently scheduled in this action are hereby vacated.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court shall retain jurisdiction for the purpose of enforcing the terms of the separate settlement agreement entered into between the Parties.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
