Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

A.A. EX REL. ARCHULETTA v. MARTINEZ, 12-cv-00732-WYD-KMT. (2013)

Court: District Court, D. Colorado Number: infdco20130910a71 Visitors: 20
Filed: Sep. 06, 2013
Latest Update: Sep. 06, 2013
Summary: AMENDED ORDER OF DISMISSAL WILEY Y. DANIEL, Senior District Judge. This matter is before the Court in review of the file. By Order of Dismissal entered earlier today (ECF No. 92), I dismissed the case in its entirety. However, the Stipulated Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 91) that was referenced in the Order of Dismissal sought to dismiss only the claims against Defendant Alex Martinez. Thus, the Order of Dismissal was entered in error to the extent to it dismissed the entire case. Since the fili
More

AMENDED ORDER OF DISMISSAL

WILEY Y. DANIEL, Senior District Judge.

This matter is before the Court in review of the file. By Order of Dismissal entered earlier today (ECF No. 92), I dismissed the case in its entirety. However, the Stipulated Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 91) that was referenced in the Order of Dismissal sought to dismiss only the claims against Defendant Alex Martinez. Thus, the Order of Dismissal was entered in error to the extent to it dismissed the entire case.

Since the filing of the Order, however, a Joint Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Claims Against Defendant Cornelius Foxworth With Prejudice was filed. That motion will be granted. Accordingly, Plaintiff now has agreed to or moved for the dismissal of the claims against both Alex Martinez and Cornelius Foxworth. The Order of Dismissal entered earlier today (ECF No. 92) is thus amended to reflect that only Defendants Alex Martinez and Cornelius Foxworth are dismissed from the case.

I further note, however, that the Stipulated Motion to Dismiss as to the claims against Alex Martinez requested that Plaintiff's motion for leave to file a third amended complaint be withdrawn or denied as moot. In accordance with that request, the motion was denied as moot in my Order of Dismissal entered earlier today. In that motion, Plaintiff sought to amend the complaint to add two individuals in lieu of Defendant John Doe. Thus, it appears that Plaintiff may no longer be asserting a claim against John Doe. Rather than simply dismiss that Defendant, however, I order Plaintiff to advise the Court within ten (10) days of this Order, or by Monday, September 16, 2013, as to the status of her claims against John Doe and whether that Defendant should also be dismissed. The case will remain open for now as to that Defendant.

In conclusion, it is

ORDERED that the Joint Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Claims Against Defendant Cornelius Foxworth With Prejudice filed September 6, 2013 (ECF No. 93) is GRANTED.

It is

FURTHER ORDERED that the Order of Dismissal entered earlier today (ECF No. 92) is amended to reflect that only Defendants Alex Martinez and Cornelius Foxworth are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, with each party to pay his or her own attorney fees and costs. The case remains open for now as to John Doe. Finally, it is

ORDERED that Plaintiff shall advise the Court on or before Monday, September 16, 2013, as to the status of her claims against Defendant John Doe and whether John Doe should also be dismissed.

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