Iredell Water Corporation v. City of Statesville

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA STATESVILLE DIVISION Case No. 5:21-CV-132

IREDELL WATER CORPORATION, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ORDER ) vs. ) ) CITY OF STATESVILLE, ) ) Defendant. )

THIS MATTER IS BEFORE the Court on the Parties “Joint Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2)” (the “Motion”). (Doc. No. 66). The Parties agree that this matter has been settled and that the Settlement Agreement attached to the Motion fully resolves all claims presented or which could have been presented in this case by both Parties. The Parties request in their Motion that this case be dismissed with prejudice and that the Court retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of their settlement agreement. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. With the consent of the Parties, the Court shall retain jurisdiction for the purposes of enforcing the terms of the Parties’ Settlement Agreement. See Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 381, 114 S. Ct. 1673, 1677, 128 L. Ed. 2d 391 (1994). 2. All claims and counterclaims presented by the Parties in this case are DISMISSED with prejudice. SO ORDERED

Signed: August 4, 2023

Leta gg oF oe Kenneth D. Bell United States District Judge nou