Turner et al v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. et al, No. 3:2012cv02701 - Document 107 (N.D. Tex. 2015)
Court Description: Order Accepting 106 Findings and Recommendations on Case. It is ordered that Defendant's 102 Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement is granted, and all of Plaintiffs' claims and causes of action against JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. are dismissed with prejudice. (Ordered by Judge Barbara M.G. Lynn on 1/14/2015) (jrr)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Turner et al v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. et al Doc. 107 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION CHARLES “RANDY” TURNER and KATHRYN L. TURNER, Plaintiffs, v. JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A. and MCCARTHY, HOLTHUS & ACKERMAN LLP, Defendants. § § § § § § § § § § § § No. 3:12-CV-2701-M (BF) ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE The Court has under consideration the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Paul D. Stickney dated December 10, 2014. The Court reviewed the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation for plain error. Finding none, the Court accepts the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant's Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement (Doc. 102) is GRANTED, and all of Plaintiffs’ claims and causes of action against JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. are DISMISSED with prejudice. SO ORDERED this 14th day of January, 2015. _________________________________ BARBARA M. G. LYNN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Dockets.Justia.com
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
