McCoy v. Delhaize America, Inc.
||Delhaize America, Inc.
||July 27, 2012
||Virginia Eastern District Court
||Robert G. Doumar
||Douglas E. Miller
|Nature of Suit:
||Other Personal Injury
|Cause of Action:
|Jury Demanded By:
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|October 11, 2012
OPINION AND ORDER - the Court GRANTS the plaintiff's motion for voluntary dismissal and this action is DISMISSED without prejudice, subject to the following conditions: (1) the plaintiff shall pay any taxable costs incurred by the defendant in t his action up until the date of this Order; (2) the plaintiff shall agree to the use of discovery materials from this case in any subsequent court proceedings related to these same claims; and (3) the plaintiff shall not at any time, in any court, re quest more than $75,000 in damages for this incident from this defendant, unless this plaintiff agrees that any such action be brought in federal court or be removable to federal court from a state court. If the plaintiff fails to satisfy these conditions, the dismissal shall be with prejudice. See Choice Hotels Int'l. Inc. v. Goodwin & Boone, 11 F.3d 469,472 (4th Cir. 1993) ("[A] district courtmust be explicit and clear in specifying that failure to meetits conditions will result in prejudicial dismissal...."). The defendant is DIRECTED to file a bill of costs with the time period specified by Local Civil Rule 54(D). Signed by District Judge Robert G. Doumar on 10/10/12 and filed on 10/11/12. (jcow, )
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 Virginia Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets were retrieved from PACER, and should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.