Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

BOHENKAMP v. JT PRIVATE DUTY HOME CARE, LLC, 2:14-cv-366-FtM-38CM. (2015)

Court: District Court, M.D. Florida Number: infdco20150212727 Visitors: 5
Filed: Feb. 11, 2015
Latest Update: Feb. 11, 2015
Summary: ORDER 1 SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL, District Judge. This matter comes before the Court on the Plaintiff, Deborah Bohenkamp and JT Private Duty Home Care, LLC's Joint Report Regarding Settlement ( Doc. #32 ) filed on February 9, 2015. In their Joint Report, the Parties request a settlement conference before the United States Magistrate Judge, therefore, this matter will be referred for that purpose. Accordingly it is now ORDERED: This matter is referred to the Honorable Douglas N. Frazier to
More

ORDER1

SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL, District Judge.

This matter comes before the Court on the Plaintiff, Deborah Bohenkamp and JT Private Duty Home Care, LLC's Joint Report Regarding Settlement (Doc. #32) filed on February 9, 2015. In their Joint Report, the Parties request a settlement conference before the United States Magistrate Judge, therefore, this matter will be referred for that purpose.

Accordingly it is now

ORDERED:

This matter is referred to the Honorable Douglas N. Frazier to conduct a settlement conference and issue any order deemed appropriate thereafter. The Parties are directed to contact Judge Frazier's chambers to arrange for a mutually agreeable time to conduct the conference.

DONE and ORDERED.

FootNotes


1. Disclaimer: Documents filed in CM/ECF may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. 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 Web sites, this court does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their Web sites. Likewise, the court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their Web sites. 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