Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

DE LAROSA v. COCA COLA COMPANY, 3:17-CV-02603-EMC. (2017)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20170719a48 Visitors: 19
Filed: Jul. 18, 2017
Latest Update: Jul. 18, 2017
Summary: CLASS ACTION STIPULATION RE DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND [PROPOSED] ORDER THEREON EDWARD M. CHEN , District Judge . Plaintiff Luis A. De Larosa ("Plaintiff") and defendant The Coca Cola Company, dba Coca-Cola North America ("Defendant"), hereby enter into the following stipulation and request the Court to enter an order in accordance herewith. STIPULATION 1. Plaintiff commenced this putative class action on April 3, 2017, in the Superior Court for County of Napa. 2. On May 5, 2
More

CLASS ACTION STIPULATION RE DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND [PROPOSED] ORDER THEREON

Plaintiff Luis A. De Larosa ("Plaintiff") and defendant The Coca Cola Company, dba Coca-Cola North America ("Defendant"), hereby enter into the following stipulation and request the Court to enter an order in accordance herewith.

STIPULATION

1. Plaintiff commenced this putative class action on April 3, 2017, in the Superior Court for County of Napa.

2. On May 5, 2017, Defendant timely removed the action to this Court on the basis of subject matter jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act ("CAFA").

3. Plaintiff intends to amend the complaint to add a cause of action for civil penalties under the Private Attorney General Act. Plaintiff's intended PAGA cause of action is not a "class action" under CAFA.

4. Given the anticipated amendment by Plaintiff to add a PAGA cause of action, and for other procedural reasons, Defendant has agreed that the claims may be properly litigated in state court.

5. So that Plaintiff may proceed to litigate his original and PAGA claims in state court, the parties mutually request that the Court dismiss this action without prejudice, with each party to bear its own respective costs and fees, with the statute of limitations on Plaintiffs' claims to be tolled such that Plaintiff may file a new complaint in state court without any change to the alleged liability period for Plaintiff's claims based on the April 3, 2017, filing date of Plaintiff's original complaint.

ORDER

Good cause having been shown, the Court hereby orders that this action is dismissed without prejudice, with each party to bear its own respective costs and fees, with the statute of limitations on Plaintiffs' claims to be tolled such that Plaintiff may file a new complaint in state court without any change to the alleged liability period for Plaintiff's claims based on the April 3, 2017, filing date of Plaintiff's original complaint.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer