Young, et al v. City Of Visalia et al
Filing
85
AMENDED ORDER of Dismissal as to Defendant Mario Krstic and Troy Everett signed by Chief Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 06/14/2011.(Flores, E)
<![CDATA[
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
8
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
10
11
12
13
14
THAD YOUNG and SANDRA YOUNG, )
)
Plaintiffs,
)
v.
)
)
CITY OF VISALIA, et al.,
)
)
)
Defendants.
)
____________________________________)
1:09-CV-115 AWI GSA
AMENDED ORDER OF
DISMISSAL AS TO
DEFENDANT MARIO KRSTIC
AND TROY EVERETT
(Doc. No. 84)
15
16
17
On June 9, 2011, the parties filed a Rule 41 stipulation for dismissal of certain parties.
18
See Doc. No. 83. The stipulation provided for the dismissal with prejudice of Defendant Mario
19
Krstic from the entirety of the case. See id. The stipulation also provided that all claims by
20
Sandra Young against Troy Everett were dismissed with prejudice. See id. The stipulation was
21
signed by all parties. See id.
22
On June 13, 2011, the Court issued an order directing the Clerk to dismiss Defendants
23
Krstic and Everett entirely from the case. The docket reflects that both Krstic and Everett were
24
terminated entirely from the case. However, as discussed above, the stipulation provided only
25
for the dismissal of Sandra Young’s claims against Everett. Plaintiff Thad Young did not
26
dismiss his claims against Everett. The Court will issue this amended order so as to accurately
27
reflect the June 9 stipulation.
28
Pursuant to the June 9 stipulation (Doc. No. 83) and the provisions of Rule 41(a), the
1
Court will again give effect to the stipulation and confirm the dismissal Defendant Mario Krstic
2
from this case with prejudice. See Doc. No. 83; Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 41(a); Wilson v. City of San
3
Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997); Carter v. Beverly Hills Sav. & Loan Asso., 884 F.2d
4
1186, 1191 (9th Cir. 1989); In re Wolf, 842 F.2d 464, 466 (D.C. Cir. 1989). Additionally,
5
Plaintiff Sandra Young’s claims against Troy Everett are dismissed with prejudice. See id.
6
Plaintiff Thad Young’s claims against Troy Everett remain in force.
7
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
8
9
1.
The Court’s June 13, 2011, order (Document No. 84) is AMENDED;
10
2.
Defendant Mario Krstic is DISMISSED from the entirety of this case with prejudice
pursuant to the June 9, 2011, stipulation and Rule 41;
11
12
3.
and
13
14
4.
17
18
The Clerk shall correct the docket to reflect that Defendant Troy Everett remains an
active defendant in this case.
15
16
Plaintiff Sandra Young’s claims against Troy Everett are DISMISSED with prejudice;
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
ciem0h
June 14, 2011
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
