Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Diaz v. AT&T Services Inc., 3:18-00327-JMC. (2018)

Court: District Court, D. South Carolina Number: infdco20180410c31 Visitors: 3
Filed: Apr. 09, 2018
Latest Update: Apr. 09, 2018
Summary: ORDER OF DISMISSAL J. MICHELLE CHILDS , District Judge . The Court having been advised by counsel for the parties that the above action has been settled as to defendant AT&T Services Inc., DirecTV LLC, IT IS ORDERED that this action is hereby dismissed without costs and without prejudice. If settlement is not consummated within thirty (30) days, either party may petition the Court to reopen this action and restore it to the calendar. Rule 60(b)(6), F.R.Civ.P. In the alternative, to the ex
More

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

The Court having been advised by counsel for the parties that the above action has been settled as to defendant AT&T Services Inc., DirecTV LLC,

IT IS ORDERED that this action is hereby dismissed without costs and without prejudice. If settlement is not consummated within thirty (30) days, either party may petition the Court to reopen this action and restore it to the calendar. Rule 60(b)(6), F.R.Civ.P. In the alternative, to the extent permitted by law, either party may within thirty (30) days petition the Court to enforce the settlement. Fairfax Countywide Citizens v. Fairfax County, 571 F.2d 1299 (4th Cir. 1978). By agreement of the parties, the court retains jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement. Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co., 511 U.S. 375, 381-82 (1994).

The dismissal hereunder shall be with prejudice if no action is taken under either alternative within thirty (30) days from the filing date of this order.

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