Dawson v. Test Equipment Corp.
Opinion
An unpub|ishelh order shall not be regarded as precedent and shall not be cited as legal authority. SCR 123.
SuPnEME CounT 0F NEvAr)A
CLERK’S ORDER
<0>~:947
IN THE SUPREME COURT ()F THE STATE OF NEVADA
FRED 0. DAWs<)N, AN INI)IVIDUAL, N@. @35@0 Appellant,
VS. TEsT EQUIPMENT CC)RP<)RATI<)N, A F § L § CALIF<)RNIA CQRP<)RATI<)N,
R@Spondent. OCT 15 2013
TRA lE K. l_lNDEMAN
ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL
The parties’ September 30, 2013, stipulation to dismiss this appeal, with the parties to bear their own costs and fees, is appr0ved. NRAP 42(10). Accordingly, we
()RDER this appeal DISMISSED.
‘ CLERK 0F THE SUPREME CQURT TRACIE K. LINDEMAN
cc: Hon. Elliott A. Sattler, II, District Judge Aaron & Paternoster, Ltd. Scarpello & Huss, Ltd. Wash0e District Court Clerk
l?~§m?‘r
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Dawson v. Test Equipment Corp. (Dawson v. Test Equipment Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.