Rosenthal v. United Van Lines

209 F. Supp. 2d 1342
CourtDistrict Court, N.D. Georgia
DecidedJune 13, 2002
Docket1:01-cr-00165
StatusPublished

This text of 209 F. Supp. 2d 1342 (Rosenthal v. United Van Lines) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Rosenthal v. United Van Lines, 209 F. Supp. 2d 1342 (N.D. Ga. 2002).

Opinion

209 F.Supp.2d 1342 (2002)

Robert S. ROSENTHAL and Fran Rosenthal, Plaintiffs,
v.
UNITED VAN LINES, LLC, Unigroup, Inc., Adco Van & Storage, Inc., Armstrong Relocation Co., and John Doe Corporation, Defendants.

No. CIV.A. 1:01-CV-165-CC.

United States District Court, N.D. Georgia, Atlanta Division.

June 13, 2002.

Frank Robert Seigel, Auden L. Grumet, Epstein, Becker & Green, Atlanta, GA, for Plaintiffs.

William L. Bost, Jr., Greenfield, Bost & Kliros, Atlanta, GA, Lawrence J. Roberts, phv, Roberts & Associates, Miami, FL, for Defendants.

ORDER VACATING PRIOR PUBLISHED OPINION AND DISMISSING CASE WITH PREJUDICE

COOPER, District Judge.

THIS MATTER came before the Court upon the Joint Motion of the parties to vacate this Court's prior opinion and to dismiss this matter with prejudice based upon a settlement agreement. Upon consideration, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that

*1343 The parties' joint motion is GRANTED.

This Court's opinion, published at 174 F.Supp.2d 1331 (N.D.Ga.2001) is VACATED. See, H.K. Porter Company, Inc. v. Metropolitan Dade County, 998 F.2d 892 (11th Cir.1993). It is further

This matter is dismissed with prejudice and without costs to either party, with each party to bear their own attorneys' fees.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
209 F. Supp. 2d 1342, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rosenthal-v-united-van-lines-gand-2002.