Hagler v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
Filing
25
STIPULATION AND ORDER re 24 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE filed by Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on May 2, 2018. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/2/2018)
14
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
15
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
16
SAN FRANCISCO/OAKLAND DIVISION
17 FRANK HAGLER,
Plaintiff,
18
19
Case No. 3:17-cv-05770-JST
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED) ORDER
OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE
vs.
20 WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION; DAWN FAILS, AND DOES
21 1-25,
[San Francisco County Superior Court Case
No. CGC-17-561141]
Defendants.
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
LAW OFFICES
STIPULATION AND (PROPOSED] ORDER OF
DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE
Allen Matkins Leck Gamble
Mallory & Natsis LLP
1077331/SF
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41, Plaintiff Frank Hagler and Defendant Wells Fargo Bank,
1
2 National Association jointly stipulate that the Complaint and all of Plaintiffs claims in this action
3 be dismissed with prejudice, and each party to bear its own attorneys' fees and costs.
4
5 Dated:
May 1, 2018
ALLEN MATKINS LECK GAMBLE
MALLORY & NATSIS LLP
6
7
By:
/s/ Alexander Nestor
---------------BALDWIN J. LEE
ALEXANDER NESTOR
Attorneys for Defendant
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.,
8
9
10
11
12 Dated:
L.//rzp-&
HOYER & HICKS
13
14
i½k R
By: ~ ~
15
SEAN D. MCHENRY
Attorneys for Plaintiff
FRANK HAGLER
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
LAW OFFICES
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER OF
DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE
Allen Matkins Leck Gamble
Mallory & Natsis LLP
1077331/SF
-1-
1
ORDER
2
PURSUANT TO THE STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
3
4 Dated:
May 2, 2018
Hon. John S. Tigar
Judge, United States District Court
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
LAW OFFICES
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED) ORDER OF
DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE
Allen Matkins Leck Gamble
Mallory & Natsis LLP
1077331/SF
-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?