Christie et al v. Vision's et al

Filing 23

ORDER granting 22 joint motion to dismiss and dismissing with prejudice this action and ordering that each party bear his or its own attorney's fees and costs. The Court will retain jurisdiction over this matter for a period of 90 days from the date of this Order to enforce the terms of the settlement agreement. Signed by Judge Kristine G. Baker on 02/01/2016. (rhm)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION NICHOLE CHRISTIE and CINDY BOYCE, each individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. PLAINTIFFS Case No. 4:15-cv-001-KGB VISION’S; TODD LAURY, individually and as officer and/or director of Vision’s; ANDREA LAURY, individually and as officer and/or director of Vision’s; RANDY MCGILL, individually and as officer and/or director of Vision’s DEFENDANTS ORDER Before the Court is a joint motion to dismiss with prejudice (Dkt. No. 22). The parties inform the Court that all claims by and among the parties have been resolved. They request that the Court enter an Order of dismissal with prejudice as to all claims that were made or could have been made in this action, and the parties ask that the Court retain jurisdiction over the settlement agreement. The parties have agreed to bear their own attorneys’ fees and costs. The joint motion to dismiss with prejudice is granted (Dkt. No. 22). The Court dismisses with prejudice this action and orders that each party bear his or its own attorneys’ fees and costs. The Court will retain jurisdiction over this matter for a period of 90 days from the date of this Order to enforce the terms of the settlement agreement. The parties may move for an extension of time for the Court to retain jurisdiction if such an extension becomes necessary. So ordered this the 1st day of February, 2016. ________________________________ Kristine G. Baker United States District Judge

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?