King v. JP Morgan Chase Bank
Filing
38
ORDER; 37 Stipulated Motion to Dismiss Certain Claims is GRANTED. Each party shall bear its own attorney fees and costs associated with prosecuting and defending these dismissed claims, by Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix on 3/20/2013.(klmcd, )
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 11-cv-01880-KLM
JANET L. KING,
Plaintiff,
v.
JP MORGAN CHASE BANK, a National Association,
Defendant.
_____________________________________________________________________
ORDER
_____________________________________________________________________
ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX
This matter is before the Court on the parties’ Stipulated Motion to Dismiss
Certain Claims [Docket No. 37; Filed March 19, 2013] (the “Motion”). This case is set for
a three-day jury trial commencing on August 26, 2013. In the Motion, the parties have
agreed to dismiss certain claims in the Complaint. Plaintiff specifically retains the following
claims:
(1)
Claim One, Equal Credit Opportunity Act (“ECOA”), 15 U.S.C. §
1691(d)(1); and
(2)
Claim Three, misrepresentation.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion [#37] is GRANTED. Accordingly,
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the following claims are DISMISSED with
prejudice:
(1)
Claim One, ECOA, 15 U.S.C. § 1691(a)(1);
-1-
(2)
Claim One, ECOA, 15 U.S.C. § 1691(d)(2);
(3)
Claim Two, tortious interference with business expectancy; and
(4)
Claim Four, Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that each party shall bear its own attorney fees and
costs associated with prosecuting and defending these dismissed claims.
Dated: March 20, 2013
-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?
