Sandoval v. Oldehoeft et al

Filing 198

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS ORDERED that: Third Party Defendant Chad E. Oldehoeft's Stipulation for Dismissal (case no. 4:12CV3129, filing 195; case no. 8:13CV102, filing 112) is granted. Third Party Defendant Chad E. Oldehoeft's claims against Defendant Murphy Group, a/k/a FW Murphy and Murphy Industries, are dismissed with prejudice, and with each party to bear their own costs and attorney fees. Chad E. Oldehoeft's Stipulation for Dismissal (case no. 4:12CV3129, filing 19 6; case no. 8:13CV102, filing 113) is granted. Sandoval and Amtrak's claims against Chad E. Oldehoeft are dismissed with prejudice, and with each party to bear their own costs and attorney fees. Leonard E. Oldehoeft's Stipulation for Dismissal (case no. 4:12CV3129, filing 197; case no. 8:13CV102, filing 114) is granted. Sandoval and Amtrak's claims against Leonard E. Oldehoeft are dismissed with prejudice, and with each party to bear their own costs and attorney fees. Leo nard E. Oldehoeft's pending Motion for Summary Judgment (case no. 4:12CV3129, filing 188; case no. 8:13CV102, filing 105) is denied as moot. Member Cases: 4:12-cv-03129-RGK-CRZ, 8:13-cv-00102-RGK-CRZ Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (TCL )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
LEONARD C. SANDOVAL,
Plaintiff,
v.
CHAD E. OLDEHOEFT, LEONARD
E. OLDEHOEFT, MURPHY
GROUP, INC., an Oklahoma
Corporation, and MURPHY
INDUSTRIES, LLC,
Defendants.

NATIONAL RAILROAD
PASSENGER CORPORATION d/b/a
AMTRAK,
Plaintiff,
v.
CHAD E. OLDEHOEFT, LEONARD
E. OLDEHOEFT, DORIS HALL,
MURPHY GROUP, INC., an
Oklahoma Corporation a/k/a FW
Murphy; and MURPHY
INDUSTRIES, LLC, a/k/a FW
Murphy,
Defendants.
______________________________

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

4:12CV3129

MEMORANDUM
AND ORDER

8:13CV102

MEMORANDUM
AND ORDER

The above-captioned cases are before me on three Stipulations for Dismissal.
(Case No. 4:12CV3129, Filings 195, 196, and 197; Case No. 8:13CV102, Filings 112,

113, and 114.) In the Stipulations, the parties ask me to dismiss (1) Third Party
Defendant Chad E. Oldehoeft’s claims against Defendant Murphy Group, a/k/a FW
Murphy and Murphy Industries, (2) Leonard C. Sandoval (“Sandoval”) and National
Railroad Passenger Corporation d/b/a Amtrak’s (“Amtrak”) claims against Chad E.
Oldehoeft, and (3) Sandoval and Amtrak’s claims against Leonard E. Oldehoeft. (Id.)
The parties request that the claims be dismissed with prejudice, and with each party
to bear their own costs and attorney fees. (Id.)
I will grant the Stipulations. In accordance with the record before the court, the
only remaining claims in the above-captioned cases are Sandoval and Amtrak’s claims
against Murphy Group, a/k/a FW Murphy and Murphy Industries. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that:
1.
Third Party Defendant Chad E. Oldehoeft’s Stipulation for Dismissal
(case no. 4:12CV3129, filing 195; case no. 8:13CV102, filing 112) is granted. Third
Party Defendant Chad E. Oldehoeft’s claims against Defendant Murphy Group, a/k/a
FW Murphy and Murphy Industries, are dismissed with prejudice, and with each party
to bear their own costs and attorney fees.
2.
Chad E. Oldehoeft’s Stipulation for Dismissal (case no. 4:12CV3129,
filing 196; case no. 8:13CV102, filing 113) is granted. Sandoval and Amtrak’s claims
against Chad E. Oldehoeft are dismissed with prejudice, and with each party to bear
their own costs and attorney fees.
3.
Leonard E. Oldehoeft’s Stipulation for Dismissal (case no. 4:12CV3129,
filing 197; case no. 8:13CV102, filing 114) is granted. Sandoval and Amtrak’s claims
against Leonard E. Oldehoeft are dismissed with prejudice, and with each party to
bear their own costs and attorney fees.

2

4.
Leonard E. Oldehoeft’s pending Motion for Summary Judgment (case
no. 4:12CV3129, filing 188; case no. 8:13CV102, filing 105) is denied as moot.
DATED this 5th day of December, 2013.
BY THE COURT:
Richard G. Kopf
Senior United States District Judge

*This opinion may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. The
U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska does not endorse, recommend,
approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on
their Web sites. Likewise, the court has no agreements with any of these third parties
or their Web sites. The court accepts no responsibility for the availability or
functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or
directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the court.
3