HELDMAN v. KING PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., 3-10-1001. (2012)
Court: District Court, M.D. Tennessee
Number: infdco20120703c82
Visitors: 5
Filed: Jul. 02, 2012
Latest Update: Jul. 02, 2012
Summary: ORDER JULIET GRIFFIN, Magistrate Judge. Pursuant to the order entered December 8, 2011 (Docket Entry No. 122), counsel for the parties called the Court on June 28, 2012, at which time the parties agreed that the plaintiffs' FLSA overtime claims will be dismissed as a result of the recent ruling of the United States Supreme Court in Chrisopher v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 2012 WL 2196779 (June 18, 2012). Counsel shall confer to determine if they can agree upon the terms of dismissal of the st
Summary: ORDER JULIET GRIFFIN, Magistrate Judge. Pursuant to the order entered December 8, 2011 (Docket Entry No. 122), counsel for the parties called the Court on June 28, 2012, at which time the parties agreed that the plaintiffs' FLSA overtime claims will be dismissed as a result of the recent ruling of the United States Supreme Court in Chrisopher v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 2012 WL 2196779 (June 18, 2012). Counsel shall confer to determine if they can agree upon the terms of dismissal of the sta..
More
ORDER
JULIET GRIFFIN, Magistrate Judge.
Pursuant to the order entered December 8, 2011 (Docket Entry No. 122), counsel for the parties called the Court on June 28, 2012, at which time the parties agreed that the plaintiffs' FLSA overtime claims will be dismissed as a result of the recent ruling of the United States Supreme Court in Chrisopher v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 2012 WL 2196779 (June 18, 2012). Counsel shall confer to determine if they can agree upon the terms of dismissal of the state law claims.
The parties shall have until July 12, 2012, to file a stipulation or agreed order of dismissal of the plaintiffs' FLSA claims, and to file a stipulation or agreed order of the plaintiffs' state law claims if the parties can reach an agreement.
If the parties are not able to reach an agreement on the disposition of the plaintiffs' state law claims, a telephone conference call will be scheduled to address how the parties intend to proceed.
It is so ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
