Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Hernandez v. Circle K Stores Inc., 2:18-cv-722-FtM-38CM. (2018)

Court: District Court, M.D. Florida Number: infdco20181120b66 Visitors: 15
Filed: Nov. 19, 2018
Latest Update: Nov. 19, 2018
Summary: OPINION AND ORDER 1 SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL , District Judge . Before the Court is the Parties' Amended Joint Stipulation for Remand to State Court (Doc. 6). Plaintiff Dalia Hernandez sued Defendant Circle K Store Inc. in the Circuit Court of the Twentieth Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County, Florida on August 13, 2018. (Doc. 1-1). Defendants then removed the case to this Court. (Doc. 1). The parties have now stipulated to remanding the case back to the state court. (Doc. 9). Accor
More

OPINION AND ORDER1

Before the Court is the Parties' Amended Joint Stipulation for Remand to State Court (Doc. 6). Plaintiff Dalia Hernandez sued Defendant Circle K Store Inc. in the Circuit Court of the Twentieth Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County, Florida on August 13, 2018. (Doc. 1-1). Defendants then removed the case to this Court. (Doc. 1). The parties have now stipulated to remanding the case back to the state court. (Doc. 9).

Accordingly, it is now

ORDERED:

The Parties' Amended Joint Stipulation for Remand to State Court (Doc. 6) is GRANTED.

1. The case is REMANDED to the Circuit Court of the Twentieth Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County, Florida. 2. The Clerk is DIRECTED to transmit a certified copy of this Order to the Clerk of the Circuit Court of the Twentieth Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County, Florida. 3. The Clerk is DIRECTED to terminate pending motions and close the case.

FootNotes


1. Disclaimer: Documents filed in CM/ECF may contain hyperlinks to other documents or websites. These hyperlinks are provided only for users' convenience. Users are cautioned that hyperlinked documents in CM/ECF are subject to PACER fees. By allowing hyperlinks to other websites, this Court does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their websites. Likewise, the Court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their websites. The Court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the Court.
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