Taron v. Alexander

W.D. Oklahoma

Taron v. Alexander

DecidedJune 24, 2019

Docket5:18-cv-01198

StatusUnknown

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

Bluebook

Taron v. Alexander, (W.D. Okla. 2019).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA DENIS TARON AND KAREN TARON, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) VS. ) No. CIV-18-1198-D ) HAROLD EUGENE ALEXANDER and ) HOLZHAUER AUTO & TRUCK SALES, INC., ) ) Defendants. ) ) ORDER ON STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)Q), the parties’ Joint Stipulation of Dismissal Without Prejudice [Doc. No. 19] operates as a voluntary dismissal without prejudice of Plaintiff’s action against Defendant Harold Eugene Alexander upon the date of filing.! Signed this 24 day of June, 2019.

TIMOTHY D. DEGIUSTI UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

! See De Leon y. Marcos, 659 F.3d 1276, 1283 (10th Cir. 2011) (“stipulation of dismissal filed under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)Q) or (ii) is self-executing”’); Janssen v. Harris, 321 F.3d 998, 1000 (10th Cir. 2003) (‘no action is required on the part of the court” to effectuate a dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1)); see also Netwig v. Ga. Pac. Corp., 375 F.3d 1009, 1010 (10th Cir. 2004) (dismissal was effective on date of Rule 41(a)(1) filing).

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA DENIS TARON AND KAREN TARON, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) VS. ) No. CIV-18-1198-D ) HAROLD EUGENE ALEXANDER and ) HOLZHAUER AUTO & TRUCK SALES, INC., ) ) Defendants. ) ) ORDER ON STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)Q), the parties’ Joint Stipulation of Dismissal Without Prejudice [Doc. No. 19] operates as a voluntary dismissal without prejudice of Plaintiff’s action against Defendant Harold Eugene Alexander upon the date of filing.! Signed this 24 day of June, 2019.

TIMOTHY D. DEGIUSTI UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

! See De Leon y. Marcos, 659 F.3d 1276, 1283 (10th Cir. 2011) (“stipulation of dismissal filed under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)Q) or (ii) is self-executing”’); Janssen v. Harris, 321 F.3d 998, 1000 (10th Cir. 2003) (‘no action is required on the part of the court” to effectuate a dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1)); see also Netwig v. Ga. Pac. Corp., 375 F.3d 1009, 1010 (10th Cir. 2004) (dismissal was effective on date of Rule 41(a)(1) filing).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Taron v. Alexander, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/taron-v-alexander-okwd-2019.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack