Lancer Insurance Company v. Vargas Romero et al
| Lancer Insurance Company |
| Rene Vargas Romero, Jane Doe Romero, Maria Vargas and John Doe Vargas |
| 2:2017cv00109 |
| January 25, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Washington |
| Seattle Office |
| XX US, Outside District |
| Robert S. Lasnik |
| Motor Vehicle |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
15
STIPULATION AND ORDER of Dismissal with Prejudice re parties' 14 Stipulation, signed by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (SWT)
|
|
Filing
13
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
10
ORDER granting 9 Stipulated Motion permitting Attorney Levi Lewis Bendele III to withdraw and Attorneys Scott Channing Wakefield and Justin Monroe to substitute as counsel for Defendants for Jane Doe Romero and Rene Vargas Romero. Signed by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (PM)
|
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.
