Merrill v. Standard Insurance Company et al

Filing 24

ORDER granting 23 Motion to Dismiss Party. Defendant Unum Life Insurance Company of America and all claims that Plaintiff asserted or could have asserted against Unum, are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Plaintiff and Unum will each bear her or its own costs and attorneys' fees. By Judge Raymond P. Moore on 10/19/2015. (athom, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge Raymond P. Moore Civil Action No. 15-cv-01532-RM-MEH TAMMY MERRILL, Plaintiff, vs. STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY and UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, Defendants. ______________________________________________________________________________ ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE OF DEFENDANT UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA ______________________________________________________________________________ This matter is before the Court, on Plaintiff Tammy Merrill’s and Defendant Unum Life Insurance Company of America’s (“Unum”) Motion for Entry of Order Granting Stipulation for Dismissal With Prejudice of Defendant Unum (ECF No. 23). Being fully advised in the premises, the Court hereby GRANTS the parties’ Stipulation for Dismissal. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff Tammy Merrill’s claims against Unum, including all claims that Plaintiff asserted or could have asserted against Unum, are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Plaintiff and Unum will each bear her or its own costs and attorneys’ fees in connection with the litigation of Plaintiff’s claims against Unum. It is: IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Unum is dismissed as a party to this action, with prejudice, and the case caption shall be amended to remove Unum as a named Defendant. DATED this 19th day of October, 2015. BY THE COURT: ____________________________________ RAYMOND P. MOORE United States District Judge 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?