Pacific Gas & Electric Company v. Simon Property Group, Inc. et al
Filing
25
STIPULATION AND ORDER re 24 Stipulated Settlement Agreement and [Proposed] Order of Dismissal filed by Pacific Gas & Electric Company. Signed by Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd on 10/23/2013. (hrllc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/23/2013)
*E-Filed: October 23, 2013*
2
3
4
5
LAW OFFICES OF DAWN CEIZLER
DAWN CEIZLER, Bar No. 214873
1990 N. California Blvd., Suite 305
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Telephone: (925) 932-8225
Facsimile: (925) 226-4849
Attorney for Plaintiff
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC
COMPANY, a California Company
Plaintiff.
vs.
SIMON PROPERTY GROUP, INC. and
DOES 1-10, inclusive,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. CV13-1043-HRL
STIPULATED SETTLEMENT
AGREEMENT AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
15
16
Pursuant to Civil L.R. 7-12, this Stipulated Settlement Agreement is entered into by and
17
between Plaintiff Pacific Gas and Electric Company ("PG&E") and Defendant Simon Property
18
Group, Inc. ("Simon").
19
WHEREAS, on January 28, 2013 PG&E filed a complaint in the Superior Court of
20
California, Contra Costa County which was removed by Simon to this Court on March 7, 2013
21
alleging damage to certain PG&E property due to a leak in a water line at The Great Mall in
22
Milpitas, California on or about October 3, 2010 (the "Complaint").
23
WHEREAS, PG&E and Simon, through their authorized representatives and without any
24
admission or fmal adjudication of the issues of fact or law with respect to PG&E' s claims, have
25
reached a settlement that they consider to be a just, fair, adequate, and equitable resolution of the
26
disputes set forth in the Complaint.
27
28
- 1STIPULATED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE DISMISSAL CV13-1043-HRL
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS STIPULATED BY AND BETWEEN THE PARTIES AS
2
3
FOLLOWS:
1. Simon shall pay PG&E a sum certain as full satisfaction of any and all claims alleged in
4
the Complaint as set forth more fully in a Settlement Agreement prepared and executed by the
5
parties.
6
7
2. In exchange for the payment described above, PG&E will dismiss all of its claims
contained in the Complaint against Simon.
8
3. In the event of an action to enforce any of the provisions of the Settlement Agreement,
9
the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the other party its reasonable attorneys' fees,
10
11
12
13
court costs and necessary disbursements incurred in connection with such action.
4. PG&E has asserted no personal injury claims in the Complaint and there is no need to
notify Medicare or any other lienholder of the settlement reached between the parties.
5. Upon approval of this agreement by the Court, all counts of PG&E' s Complaint shall be
14
dismissed with prejudice. The parties hereby stipulate and respectfully request that the Court
15
retain jurisdiction to oversee compliance with the terms of this Agreement and to resolve any
16
motions to modify such terms.
17
18
19
Dated: October
/5, 2013
amuel S. Baxter, Esq.
Counsel for Defendant Simon Property Group, Inc.
20
21
Dated: October tS , 2013
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
- 2STIPULATED SETTLEtvffiNT AGREEMENT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE DISMISSALCV13-1043-HRL
1
2
3
The Court having been notified of the settlement of this action, and it appearing that no
issue remains for the Court's determination,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT this action and all claims asserted herein are
4
DISMISSED with prejudice. In the event that the settlement is not perfected, any party may move
5
to reopen the case and the trial will be rescheduled, provided that such motion is filed within 35
6
days of this order. All scheduled dates, including the trial and pretrial dates, are VACATED.
7
IT IS SO ORDERED
8
9
Dated: October_, 20 13
23
Howard R. Lloyd
United States Magistrate Judge
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3STIPULATED SETILEMENT AGREEMENT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE DISMISSAL CV13-1043-HRL
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?