Preston v. United States of America et al

Filing 69

CONSENT JUDGMENT re 68 Stipulation filed by United States of America. Signed by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton on 8/4/09. (nah, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/4/2009)

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 TONY WEST Assistant Attorney General JOSEPH P. RUSSONIELLO United States Attorney R. MICHAEL UNDERHILL Attorney in Charge, West Coast Office Torts Branch, Civil Division JEANNE M. FRANKEN Trial Attorneys Torts Branch, Civil Division U.S. Department of Justice 7-5395 Federal Bldg., P.O. Box 36028 450 Golden Gate Avenue San Francisco, California 94102-3463 Telephone: (415) 436-6644; (415) 436-6646 E-mail: jeanne.franken@usdoj.gov Attorneys for Defendant & Third-Party Plaintiff United States of America UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION KARI PRESTON, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, BAE SYSTEMS SF SHIP REPAIR, INC., and DOES 1 through 10, Inclusive, Defendants. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Cross-Claimant, v. ) Civil No. C-07-3861-PJH ) ) IN ADMIRALTY ) ) ) ) CONSENT JUDGMENT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 1 Case No. C 07-3861 PJH CONSENT JUDGMENT 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 BAE SYSTEMS SAN FRANCISCO SHIP REPAIR, INC., Cross-Defendant. BAE SYSTEMS SAN FRANCISCO SHIP REPAIR, INC., Cross-Claimant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Cross-Defendant, BAE SYSTEMS SAN FRANCISCO SHIP REPAIR, INC., Cross-Claimant, v. SEACOAST ELECTRONICS, INC., Cross-Defendant. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Third-Party Plaintiff, v. SEACOAST ELECTRONICS, INC., Third-Party Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) The above-captioned actions having been compromised, pursuant to an agreement otherwise commemorated and consisting of offer letters and an acceptance, whereby certain sums will be paid to the plaintiff in return for a dismissal with prejudice of all claims herein by and against all parties hereto once said sums are paid; and further 2 Case No. C 07-3861 PJH CONSENT JUDGMENT 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 It being understood that a consent judgment against the United States must be entered in order for it to obtain its portion of the settlement proceeds from the United States Treasury; it is, therefore, upon the subjoined consents of counsel, hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that defendant, United States of America, shall pay to the "Law Offices of Lyle C. Cavin, Jr. & Associates, in trust for plaintiff, Kari Preston", the sum of Sixteen Thousand, Six Hundred and Sixty-Six Dollars and Sixty-Six Cents ($16,666.66), without interest and without costs. DONE and ORDERED this 4th day of August UNIT ED , 2009 at San Francisco, S S DISTRICT TE C TA California. ER We hereby consent to the entry of the foregoing Consent Judgment: N F D IS T IC T O R Dated: August 3 , 2009 TONY WEST Assistant Attorney General JOSEPH P. RUSSONIELLO United States Attorney R. MICHAEL UNDERHILL Attorney in Charge, West Coast Office Torts Branch, Civil Division s/Jeanne M. Franken JEANNE M. FRANKEN Trial Attorneys Torts Branch, Civil Division U.S. Department of Justice Attorneys for Defendant & Third-Party Plaintiff United States of America CONSENT JUDGMENT 3 Case No. C 07-3861 PJH A C LI FO Judge P hyllis J. n Hamilto R NIA O OR IT IS S UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE NO DERED RT U O RT H 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 Dated: July 17 , 2009 Law Offices of Lyle C. Cavin, Jr. s/Christopher Goodroe CHRISTOPHER GOODROE Attorneys for Plaintiff Kari Preston Dated: July 28 , 2009 Buty & Curliano LLP s/Madeline L. Buty MADELINE L. BUTY Attorneys for Defendant and Third-party Plaintiff Bae Systems SF Ship Repair, Inc. Dated: July 17 , 2009 Burnham Brown s/Ronnie R. Gipson RONNIE R. GIPSON Attorneys for Third-Party Defendant Seacoast Electronics, Inc. CONSENT JUDGMENT 4 Case No. C 07-3861 PJH

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?