Carolyn Penna v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc et al
Filing
13
ORDER RE: JOINT STIPULATION THAT DAMAGES WILL NOT EXCEED $74,999.00, STIPULATION TO REMAND by Judge Philip S. Gutierrez. Case remanded to Superior Court of California Los Angeles County, Case number RIC1615432. Case Terminated. Made JS-6 (lom)
1
E-FILED 4/4/17
2
JS-6
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA – EASTERN DIVISION
10
11
CAROLYN PENNA,
12
Plaintiff,
v.
13
14
15
HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INC., DOES 1
TO 100,
Defendants.
16
Case No: 5:17-CV-00450 PSG(SPX)
[RIVERSIDE SUPERIOR COURT
ACTION NO.: RIC1615432]
(Complaint filed on November 21, 2016)
[PROPOSED] ORDER RE: JOINT
STIPULATION THAT DAMAGES
WILL NOT EXCEED $74,999.00,
STIPULATION TO REMAND
Trial Date: None Set
17
18
19
ORDER
20
The Parties to the above-referenced action filed a Joint Stipulation that damages
21
22
23
will not exceed $74,999.00 and to remand the removed action. The Court having
reviewed the Joint Stipulation, and good cause appearing, orders as follows:
24
25
1. Plaintiff’s Statement of Damages is deemed amended to reflect $74,999.00 in
26
claimed damages, and such amendment is deemed a judicial admission. As
27
such, Plaintiff’s recoverable damages are limited to $74,999.00; and
28
///
-1[PROPOSED] ORDER RE: JOINT STIPULATION THAT DAMAGES WILL NOT EXCEED $74,999.00 AND STIPULATION TO REMAND
1
2. Central District of California Case Number 5:17-CV-00450 PSG(SPX) styled
2
CAROLYN PENNA v. HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INC. is hereby remanded to
3
Riverside County Superior Court.
4
5
IT IS SO ORDERED:
6
7
8
4/4/17
Dated: ____________________
_________________________________
Honorable Philip S. Guiterrez
United States District Court Judge
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2[PROPOSED] ORDER RE: JOINT STIPULATION THAT DAMAGES WILL NOT EXCEED $74,999.00 AND STIPULATION TO REMAND
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?