Michel C Brooks et al v. Ford Motor Company
Michel C Brooks and Jordan R Brooks |
Ford Motor Company |
8:2016cv00703 |
April 14, 2016 |
US District Court for the Central District of California |
David O Carter |
Jay C Gandhi |
Contract: Other |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1330 Breach of Contract |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on June 23, 2016. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 15 ORDER by Judge David O. Carter on Stipulation of Voluntary Dismissal #14 . On June 22, 2016, plaintiffs MICHEL C. BROOKS and JORDAN R. BROOKS along with defendant FORD MOTOR COMPANY, entered into a stipulation pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. By the stipulation, the Parties agreed that the above-captioned action is voluntarily dismissed with prejudice in its entirety. Therefore, good cause having been shown and the parties having stipulated to same, the Court hereby makes the following order: IT IS ORDERED THAT: 1. This entire action is dismissed with prejudice, and each party shall bear their own fees and costs. (Made JS-6. Case Terminated.) (dro) |
Filing 14 STIPULATION to Dismiss Case pursuant to 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) filed by Plaintiffs Jordan R Brooks, Michel C Brooks. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Le Pere, Jeffrey) |
Filing 13 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Michel C Brooks, Jordan R Brooks, upon Defendant Ford Motor Company served on 4/27/2016, answer due 6/17/2016. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon FORD MOTOR COMPANY in compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure by service on a domestic corporation, unincorporated association, or public entity.Original Summons returned. (Barry, Christopher) |
Filing 12 STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to Ford Motor Company answer now due 6/17/2016, re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 filed by Defendant Ford Motor Company. (Attachments: #1 Declaration Declaration of Service)(Attorney Sotera L Anderson added to party Ford Motor Company(pty:dft))(Anderson, Sotera) |
Filing 11 INITIAL STANDING ORDER FOLLOWING ASSIGNMENT OF CIVIL CASE TO JUDGE CARTER. |
Filing 10 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 as to Defendant Ford Motor Company. (ghap) |
Filing 9 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (ghap) |
Filing 8 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge David O. Carter and Magistrate Judge Jay C. Gandhi. (ghap) |
Filing 7 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 filed by Plaintiffs Jordan R Brooks, Michel C Brooks. (Le Pere, Jeffrey) |
Filing 6 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiffs Jordan R Brooks, Michel C Brooks, identifying None. (Le Pere, Jeffrey) |
Filing 5 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiffs Jordan R Brooks, Michel C Brooks. (Le Pere, Jeffrey) |
Filing 4 STATEMENT Damages filed by Plaintiffs Jordan R Brooks, Michel C Brooks Statement of Actual and Punitive Damages (Le Pere, Jeffrey) |
Filing 3 AFFIDAVIT by affiant: Jordan R. Brooks Affidavit of Venue filed by Plaintiffs Jordan R Brooks, Michel C Brooks (Le Pere, Jeffrey) |
Filing 2 AFFIDAVIT by affiant: Michel C. Brooks Affidavit of Venue filed by Plaintiffs Jordan R Brooks, Michel C Brooks (Le Pere, Jeffrey) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: 0973-17645119 - Fee: $400, filed by Plaintiffs Michel C Brooks, Jordan R Brooks. (Attorney Jeffrey L Le Pere added to party Jordan R Brooks(pty:pla), Attorney Jeffrey L Le Pere added to party Michel C Brooks(pty:pla))(Le Pere, Jeffrey) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.