Smith v. City of Bakersfield et al
Filing
23
STIPULATION and ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE signed by Judge Oliver W. Wanger on 05/05/2010. CASE CLOSED.(Lundstrom, T)
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
DANIEL RODRIGUEZ, ESQ., SBN 096625 CHARLES R. CHAPMAN, ESQ., SBN 115505 RODRIGUEZ & ASSOCIATES 2020 EYE STREET, BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301 TELEPHONE: (661) 323-1400 FAX: (661) 323-0132 Attorneys for Plaintiff SHANNON SMITH
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SHANON SMITH, Plaintiff, vs. CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, BAKERSFIELD POLICE DEPARTMENT, KELLY WILLIAMS, JUSTIN LEWIS, and DOES 1 to 100, Inclusive, Defendants.
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case No. 1:09-CV-01640 OWW GSA STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE ORDER THEREON [Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii)]
/// /// /// /// ///
STIPULATION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE -1-
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
DEAC_Signature-END:
STIPULATION IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between all of the parties to this action through their undersigned counsel that the above-captioned action be dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, with all parties to bear their own fees and costs. DATED: May 5, 2010 RODRIGUEZ & ASSOCIATES By: /s/ Charles Chapman . Charles R. Chapman, Esq. Attorneys for Plaintiff SHANON SMITH DATED: May 5, 2010 MARDEROSIAN, RUNYON, CERCONE, LEHMAN & ARMO By: /s/ Michael E. Lehman . Michael E. Lehman, Esq. Attorneys for Defendants CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, BAKERSFIELD POLICE DEPARTMENT, and KELLY WILLIAMS, JUSTIN LEWIS ORDER IT IS SO ORDERED that that the above-captioned action is dismissed with prejudice, with all parties to bear their own fees and costs.
IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated:
May 5, 2010
/s/ Oliver W. Wanger
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
emm0d64h
STIPULATION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE -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?
