Suggs et al v. 24 Hour Fitness Worldwide, Inc. et al

Filing 7

STIPULATION AND ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 8/16/2010 ORDERING that the terms of this Stipulation are APPROVED and ADOPTED, and this action shall be dismissed and the Parties may submit the claims to binding arbitration. CASE CLOSED(Reader, L)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Kathleen Maylin (SBN: 155371) JACKSON LEWIS LLP 199 Fremont Street, 10th Floor San Francisco, California 94105 Telephone: (415) 394-9400 Facsimile: (415) 394-9401 E-mail: maylink@jacksonlewis.com Attorneys for Defendant 24 Hour Fitness USA, Inc. (erroneously sued as "24 Hour Fitness Worldwide, Inc.") John L. Burris (State Bar No. 69888) Law Offices of John L. Burris 7677 Oakport St., Suite 1120 Oakland, CA 94621 Telephone: (510) 839-5200 Facsimile: (510) 839-3882 E-mail: john.burris@johnburrislaw.com Attorneys for Plaintiffs Kandace Suggs and Ephraim Walker UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA KANDACE SUGGS, ET AL., Plaintiff(s), v. 24 HOUR FITNESS WORLDWIDE, INC.; ET AL, Defendant(s). Case No. 2:10-cv-1573 JAM DAD STIPULATION RE DISMISSAL OF ACTION AND REFERRAL TO BINDING ARBITRATION; ORDER Complaint Filed: June 23, 2010 TO THE HONORABLE COURT: WHEREAS on October 24, 2000, December 22, 2000, and January 30, 2005, Plaintiff Kandace C. Suggs signed acknowledgements agreeing to arbitrate any dispute, claim or controversy arising out of her employment (or termination of employment) with her former employer, 24 Hour Fitness USA, Inc. ("24 Hour Fitness") (collectively "the Parties"), and to submit the dispute to a neutral arbitrator for resolution via binding arbitration. 1 STIPULATION RE DISMISSAL OF ACTION AND REFERRAL TO BINDING ARBITRATION; [PROPOSED] ORDER PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com Case No. CV-01573-JAM-DAD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WHEREAS on June 23, 2010, Plaintiff Kandace C. Suggs and her husband, Ephraim Walker, filed a Complaint ("Complaint") in the United States District Court, Eastern District of California, alleging sexual harassment and other related employment claims against 24 Hour Fitness. WHEREAS on August 6, 2010, Plaintiffs agreed to dismiss this civil action and submit their claims to final and binding arbitration pursuant to the terms of the employment agreement. IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the Parties through their respective counsel of record: 1. This action be dismissed to allow the parties to submit to binding arbitration pursuant to contractual agreement 2. The parties will refer this matter for binding arbitration before a mutually agreed upon arbitrator at JAMS San Francisco. IT IS SO STIPULATED: Dated: August 16, 2010 JACKSON LEWIS LLP By: ___________________________________ Kathleen Maylin Attorneys for Defendant 24 Hour Fitness USA, Inc. (erroneously sued as "24 Hour Fitness Worldwide, Inc.") Dated: August 11, 2010 LAW OFFICES OF JOHN L. BURRIS By: ___________________________________ John L. Burris Attorneys for Plaintiffs Kandace Suggs and Ephraim Walker 2 STIPULATION RE DISMISSAL OF ACTION AND REFERRAL TO BINDING ARBITRATION; [PROPOSED] ORDER PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com Case No. CV-01573-JAM-DAD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDER Based on this Stipulation of the Parties and for good cause shown, it is hereby ordered that the terms of this Stipulation are approved and adopted, and this action shall be dismissed and the Parties may submit the claims to binding arbitration. THE FOREGOING STIPULATION IS APPROVED AND IS SO ORDERED. Dated: August 16, 2010 /s/ John A. Mendez____________ United States District Court Judge 3 STIPULATION RE DISMISSAL OF ACTION AND REFERRAL TO BINDING ARBITRATION; [PROPOSED] ORDER PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com Case No. CV-01573-JAM-DAD

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?