Robyn Griffin v. Samuel Merritt University
Filing
25
STIPULATION AND ORDER re 24 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER FOR DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE filed by Robyn Griffin, Samuel Merritt University, ***Civil Case Terminated.. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kandis A. Westmore on 9/30/16. (sisS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/30/2016)
1
2
3
4
5
6
MICHAEL A. SCHAPS (SBN 247423)
THE SCHAPS LAW OFFICE, A.P.C.
732 THIRD STREET, SUITE B
DAVIS, CA 96516
Telephone: (530) 238-5111
Facsimile: (530) 231-2829
Attorney for Plaintiff
Robyn Griffin
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
ROBYN GRIFFIN, an individual,
Case No. 16-CV-01920-KAW
Plaintiff,
12
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER FOR DISMISSAL WITH
PREJUDICE
vs.
13
14
15
SAMUEL MERRITT UNIVERSITY, a California
Corporation,
16
Defendant.
17
18
19
///
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE
1
1
The parties hereto, having resolved their dispute pursuant to a written settlement
2
agreement executed on September 22, 2016, hereby stipulate to the dismissal with prejudice of
3
this action, each party to bear its own attorneys’ fees and costs. The Court shall retain
4
jurisdiction to enforce the parties’ settlement agreement.
5
6
Dated: September 27, 2016
THE SCHAPS LAW OFFICE, A.P.C.
7
By: _________/s/_________________
Michael A. Schaps
Attorney for Plaintiff Robyn Griffin
8
9
10
Dated: September 27, 2016
FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP
11
By: _________/s/_________________
Alexander Hernaez
Attorney for Defendant Samuel Merritt
University
12
13
14
15
16
17
It is hereby ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, each party to
bear its own attorneys’ fees and costs. The Court will retain jurisdiction to enforce the parties’
settlement agreement.
18
19
9/30/16
Dated: ________
__________________________
20
United States Magistrate Judge
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE
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?