Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

GOMEZ v. TARGET CORPORATION, 2:16-cv-01777-JAM-EFB. (2017)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20170914968 Visitors: 8
Filed: Sep. 12, 2017
Latest Update: Sep. 12, 2017
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL OF SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF FOR BREACH OF EXPRESS CONTRACT, WITH PREJUDICE, PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). JOHN A. MENDEZ , District Judge . The Parties, by and through their respective attorneys of record, hereby Stipulate and agree that Plaintiff's Second Claim For Relief for "Breach of Express Contract," set forth in Plaintiff's Complaint for Damages, including without limitation paragraphs 28 through 32, shall be dismisse
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL OF SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF FOR BREACH OF EXPRESS CONTRACT, WITH PREJUDICE, PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 41(a)(1)(A)(ii).

The Parties, by and through their respective attorneys of record, hereby Stipulate and agree that Plaintiff's Second Claim For Relief for "Breach of Express Contract," set forth in Plaintiff's Complaint for Damages, including without limitation paragraphs 28 through 32, shall be dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii).

ORDER

Pursuant to the Stipulation of the Parties, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the second claim for relief, for "Breach of Express Contract", set forth in paragraphs 28 through 32 of the Complaint for Damages filed by Plaintiff Armando Gomez against Defendant Target Corporation, shall be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Plaintiff shall not pursue any claim, damage or injury arising out of or asserting the existence and/or breach of any express contract allegedly entered into between Plaintiff and Target Corporation.

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