Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

TENORIO v. HUNT BUILDING COMPANY

United States District Court, S.D. California


December 20, 2005.

KENNETH TENORIO, individually, and on behalf of other members of the general public similarly situated, Plaintiffs,
v.
HUNT BUILDING COMPANY, LTD., a Texas limited partnership improperly sued as HUNT BUILDING CORPORATION, a Texas corporation; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive Defendants.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: ROGER BENITEZ, District Judge

STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL AND [PROPOSED] ORDER THEREON

The parties of record to the above-referenced action, Plaintiff KENNETH TENORIO and Defendant HUNT BUILDING COMPANY, LTD. (collectively the "Parties of Record"), by and through their respective attorneys of record hereby stipulate as follows:

  1. Apart from the Parties of Record, no other parties have been named or have appeared in this action;

  2. The Parties of Record have settled the above-referenced action. The terms and conditions of the settlement are confidential; 3. Pursuant to the terms of the confidential settlement and Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, MR. TENORIO hereby agrees that this action, and each and every claim for relief alleged therein, shall be dismissed with prejudice as to himself;

  4. Pursuant to the terms of the confidential settlement and Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, MR. TENORIO hereby agrees that this action, and each and every claim for relief alleged therein, shall be dismissed without prejudice as to the members or potential members of the class defined in the First-Amended Complaint;

  5. Nothing in this Stipulation is intended or shall be construed to be an admission by HUNT BUILDING COMPANY, LTD. as to the validity of any claim for relief or the viability, propriety or existence of any class with respect to any claim for relief alleged in the First-Amended Complaint;

  6. The Parties of Record shall each bear their own attorneys' fees and costs with respect to the Action and the negotiation, drafting, and execution of the settlement agreement, including this stipulated order of dismissal; and

  7. This Stipulation may be executed and submitted to the Court in counterparts with facsimile signatures, each of which shall be deemed an original and all of which shall together constitute one Stipulation. [PROPOSED] ORDER OF DISMISSAL

  Pursuant to the above Stipulation of the Parties of Record and Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and good cause appearing therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

  1. This action, and each and every claim for relief alleged therein, is hereby dismissed with prejudice as to Plaintiff KENNETH TENORIO;

  2. This action, and each and every claim for relief alleged therein, is hereby dismissed without prejudice as to the members or potential members of the class defined in the First-Amended Complaint; and

  3. The Parties of Record shall each bear their own costs, including attorneys' fees, incurred in connection with this action. I am employed in the County of San Diego, State of California. I am over the age of 18 years and not a party to the within action; my business address is 550 West C Street, Suite 1500, San Diego, California 92101.

  On December 16, 2005, I served the foregoing document(s), described as:

  STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL AND [PROPOSED] ORDER THEREON ? by placing the [] original ? a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope addressed as follows:

 

Mark Yablonovich, Esq. Marc Primo, Esq. Greg Ryan, Esq. INITIATIVE LEGAL GROUP, LLP 1875 Century Park East, Suite 1800 Los Angeles, CA 90067 (310) 556-5637; (310) 861-9051-FAX Attorneys for Plaintiffs/Class Members
  ? BY U.S. MAIL. I deposited such envelope in the mail at San Diego, California. The envelopes were mailed with postage thereon fully prepaid.

 

I am readily familiar with Sullivan, Hill, Lewin, Rez & Engel's practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. Under that practice, documents are deposited with the U.S. Postal Service on the same day which is stated in the proof of service, with postage fully prepaid at San Diego, California in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that on motion of party served, service is presumed invalid if the postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after the date stated in this proof of service.
  I declare that I am employed in the office of a member of the bar of this court at whose direction the service was made. Executed on December 16, 2005, at San Diego, California.

20051220

© 1992-2006 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.