Duck v. Carthage Ambulance Service, Inc. et al

Filing 50

AGREED ORDER DISMISSING CLAIMS as to Roger Stevenson. Signed by District Judge Sharion Aycock on 7/24/2017. (adm)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI ABERDEEN DIVISION VAN S. DUCK, Individually and on behalf of the Wrongful Death Beneficiaries of GUSSIE DUCK DECEASED VERSUS PLAINTIFF CIVIL ACTION NO: 1:16-CV-135-SA-DAS CARTHAGE AMBULANCE SERVICE, INC., TIMOTHY BLACKWELL, RODNEY WOODSON, ROGER STEVENSON and JOHN DOES 1-10 DEFENDANTS ORDER DISMISSING CLAIMS AND COMPLAINT BY REASON OF SETTLEMENT The Court has been advised by counsel for the plaintiff and counsel for the defendant, Roger Stevenson (“Stevenson”), that the claims and complaint of the plaintiff, Van S. Duck and all wrongful death beneficiaries of Gussie Duck, deceased, against Stevenson have been settled, pending determination of heirship and final consummation of the settlement. Therefore, it is not necessary that the complaint against Stevenson remain on the docket of the Court or that Stevenson be required to participate in ongoing litigation activity involving the remaining claims against the other defendants. IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED, that the claims and complaint of the plaintiff against Roger Stevenson are dismissed without prejudice, pending consummation of the settlement and entry of a final judgment of dismissal with prejudice. The Court retains complete jurisdiction to vacate this order and to reopen the action upon cause shown that settlement has not been completed and further litigation is necessary. SO ORDERED, this the 24th day of July, 2017. /s/ Sharion Aycock UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE APPROVED: /s/ HIAWATHA NORTHINGTON, II Attorney for Plaintiff /s/ RONALD L. ROBERTS Attorney for Defendant, Roger Stevenson duck v. carthage abulance 116cv135 dism stevenson

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?