Stringfellow v. Southfork Bay Development Group LLC
Filing
55
ORDER pursuant to the 50 54 Stipulations of Dismissal, pltf's claims against defts Carl and Kathleen Samuels, Southfork Bay Development Group LLC, and John Cunningham Enterprises are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; pltf's claims against deft Horton Construction and Development Inc are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; this action is hereby DISMISSED IN ITS ENTIRETY. Signed by Judge Susan Webber Wright on 11/4/11. (vjt)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
WESTERN DIVISION
RICKEY STRINGFELLOW,
Plaintiff
VS.
SOUTHFORK BAY DEVELOPMENT
GROUP, LLC
Defendant
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
NO: 4:08CV00575 SWW
ORDER
Plaintiff Rickey Stringfellow (“Stringfellow”) brings this action pursuant to Title III of
the Americans with Disabilities Act. Before the Court are joint stipulations of dismissal by
Stringfellow and separate defendants Carl and Kathleen Samuels, Southfork Bay Development
Group, LLC, and John Cunningham Enterprises, requesting that the Court dismiss Plaintiff’s
claims against these separate defendants, with prejudice (docket entries #50, #54). The
complaint also names defendant Horton Construction and Development, Inc., but Stringfellow
reports that he was unable to serve this separate defendant a copy of the complaint and summons
(docket entry #52).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s claims against separate defendants Carl
and Kathleen Samuels, Southfork Bay Development Group, LLC, and John Cunningham
Enterprises are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, pursuant to stipulation.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s claims against separate Defendant Horton
Construction and Development, Inc. are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
1
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED IN ITS ENTIRETY.
IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 4th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2011.
/s/Susan Webber Wright
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?