Ro v. Everest Indemnity Insurance Company et al
Daeil Ro |
Everest Indemnity Insurance Company and Brown & Brown Program Insurance Services Inc |
2:2016cv00664 |
May 9, 2016 |
US District Court for the Western District of Washington |
Seattle Office |
King |
Robert S. Lasnik |
Insurance |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
Both |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 68 STIPULATION AND ORDER dismissing Plaintiff Daeil Lo's claims, including but not limited to all contractual and extra-contractual claims, against Defendant Everest with prejudice. Signed by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (PM) |
Filing 66 STIPULATION AND ORDER granting stipulated motion 65 to extend the deadline to consummate settlement; deadline extended to 7/31/2017, signed by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (PM) |
Filing 63 ORDER OF DISMISSAL: Counsel having notified the Court of settlement of this case, and it appearing that no issue remains for the Court's determination, IT IS ORDERED that this action and all claims asserted herein are DISMISSED without prejudice and without costs to any party. In the event that settlement is not perfected, any party may move to reopen the case within 60 days of the date of this order. Any trial date and pretrial dates previously set are hereby VACATED. Signed by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (KERR) |
Filing 56 ORDER granting in part plaintiff's 41 Motion to Compel, by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (KERR) |
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 Washington Western 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.