James B. Tuck Enterprises, Inc. v. Paul Evert RV Country et al
Filing
15
ORDER DISMISSING CASE signed by Senior Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 11/2/2012. CASE CLOSED.(Lundstrom, T)
McCormick, Barstow, Sheppard,
Wayte & Carruth LLP
David L. Emerzian, #222930
5 River Park Place East
Fresno, California 93720-1501
Telephone:
(559) 433-1300
Facsimile:
(559) 433-2300
Attorneys for JAMES B. TUCK ENTERPRISES,
INC. dba TOY HAULER LIQUIDATORS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, FRESNO DIVISION
JAMES B. TUCK ENTERPRISES, INC. dba
TOY HAULER LIQUIDATORS,
Case No. 1:12-CV-01021-AWI-BAM
REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL WITH
PREJUDICE
[Rule 41(a)(1)]
Plaintiff,
v.
PAUL EVERT RV COUNTRY, a California
Partnership; PAUL EVERT, an individual,
Defendants.
Plaintiff JAMES B. TUCK ENTERPRISES, INC. dba TOY HAULER LIQUIDATORS, by
and through their counsel of record and Defendants PAUL EVERT RV COUNTRY, a California
partnership, PAUL EVERT, an individual by and through their attorneys of record, and pursuant to
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 41(a)(1), do hereby dismiss the within action in its entirety
with prejudice. Each party to bear it’s own attorneys’ fees and costs of suit incurred.
Dated: October 31, 2012
McCORMICK, BARSTOW, SHEPPARD,
WAYTE & CARRUTH LLP
/s/ David L. Emerzian
David L. Emerzian
Attorneys for James B. Tuck dba Toy Hauler
Liquidators
By:
Request for Dismissal
Dated: October 31, 2012
VITALE & LOWE
/a/ Alan W. Foutz
Alan W. Foutz
Attorneys for Paul Evert Rv Country & Paul Evert,
an individual
By:
ORDER
Pursuant to the above notice of Rule 41(a)(1) dismissal with prejudice, this case terminated
automatically. Duke Energy Trading & Mktg., LLC v. Davis, 267 F.3d 1042, 1049 (9th Cir. 2001). The
Clerk shall close this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: November 2, 2012
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
DEAC_S
igna
ture
-END
:
ciem0h3i
Request for Dismissal
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?