Montes v. City and County of San Francisco, 17-cv-02928-JSC. (2018)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20180611590
Visitors: 23
Filed: Jun. 08, 2018
Latest Update: Jun. 08, 2018
Summary: ORDER OF DISMISSAL Re: Dkt. No. 20 JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY , Magistrate Judge . The Court having been advised that the parties have agreed to a settlement of this case, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this case is dismissed in its entirety with prejudice; provided, however, that if any party hereto shall certify to this Court, within ninety (90) days, with proof of service of a copy thereon to opposing counsel, that the agreed consideration for said settlement has not been delivered over, the f
Summary: ORDER OF DISMISSAL Re: Dkt. No. 20 JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY , Magistrate Judge . The Court having been advised that the parties have agreed to a settlement of this case, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this case is dismissed in its entirety with prejudice; provided, however, that if any party hereto shall certify to this Court, within ninety (90) days, with proof of service of a copy thereon to opposing counsel, that the agreed consideration for said settlement has not been delivered over, the fo..
More
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
Re: Dkt. No. 20
JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY, Magistrate Judge.
The Court having been advised that the parties have agreed to a settlement of this case,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this case is dismissed in its entirety with prejudice; provided, however, that if any party hereto shall certify to this Court, within ninety (90) days, with proof of service of a copy thereon to opposing counsel, that the agreed consideration for said settlement has not been delivered over, the foregoing Order shall stand vacated and this case shall forthwith be restored to the calendar to be set for trial.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
