HYACINTHE v. PIEDMONT AIRLINES

E.D. Pennsylvania

HYACINTHE v. PIEDMONT AIRLINES

DecidedAugust 17, 2021

Docket2:20-cv-05222

StatusUnknown

This text of HYACINTHE v. PIEDMONT AIRLINES (HYACINTHE v. PIEDMONT AIRLINES) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

HYACINTHE v. PIEDMONT AIRLINES, (E.D. Pa. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

CECILE HYACINTHE, : : Plaintiff, : : CIVIL ACTION v. : : PIEDMONT AIRLINES : No. 20-cv-05222-WB : Defendant. : O R D E R

AND NOW this 17th day of August, 2021, upon consideration of Defendant’s Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement (Doc. No 27), it is ORDERED that: 1. Defendant’s Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement (Doc. No. 27) is GRANTED IN PART. Plaintiff shall comply with the written settlement agreement provided by Defendant except for the provision regarding an award of attorneys’ fees and costs to the prevailing party in any action to enforce the settlement agreement. 2. In all other respects, Defendant’s motion is DENIED. 3. The parties shall advise me within ten days regarding whether they wish to object to my findings and what right of appeal, if any, they will choose to exercise before the case is closed. Failure to advise me of such may forfeit the parties’ rights of appeal. See Shell’s Disposal and Recycling, Inc. v. City of Lancaster, 504 F. App’x 194, 200 n.9 (3d Cir. 2012). BY THE COURT:

s/Richard A. Lloret ____________ RICHARD A. LLORET U.S. Magistrate Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

CECILE HYACINTHE, : : Plaintiff, : : CIVIL ACTION v. : : PIEDMONT AIRLINES : No. 20-cv-05222-WB : Defendant. : O R D E R

AND NOW this 17th day of August, 2021, upon consideration of Defendant’s Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement (Doc. No 27), it is ORDERED that: 1. Defendant’s Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement (Doc. No. 27) is GRANTED IN PART. Plaintiff shall comply with the written settlement agreement provided by Defendant except for the provision regarding an award of attorneys’ fees and costs to the prevailing party in any action to enforce the settlement agreement. 2. In all other respects, Defendant’s motion is DENIED. 3. The parties shall advise me within ten days regarding whether they wish to object to my findings and what right of appeal, if any, they will choose to exercise before the case is closed. Failure to advise me of such may forfeit the parties’ rights of appeal. See Shell’s Disposal and Recycling, Inc. v. City of Lancaster, 504 F. App’x 194, 200 n.9 (3d Cir. 2012). BY THE COURT:

s/Richard A. Lloret ____________ RICHARD A. LLORET U.S. Magistrate Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

HYACINTHE v. PIEDMONT AIRLINES, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hyacinthe-v-piedmont-airlines-paed-2021.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack