From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Caplinger v. Farley

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION
Jan 25, 2013
Case No. 3:12-CV-97 (S.D. Ohio Jan. 25, 2013)

Opinion

Case No. 3:12-CV-97

01-25-2013

CAROL CAPLINGER et al. , Plaintiffs, v. WHITFIELD FARLEY, III et al., Defendant.


District Judge Thomas M. Rose

Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman


ORDER OF DISMISSAL: TERMINATION ENTRY

The Court having been advised by both parties that the above matter has been settled, IT IS ORDERED that this action is hereby DISMISSED, with prejudice as to the parties, provided that any of the parties may, upon good cause shown within sixty (60) days, reopen the action if settlement is not consummated.

Parties intending to preserve this Court's jurisdiction to enforce the settlement should be aware of Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of America, 114 S.Ct. 1673 (1994), and incorporate appropriate language in any substituted judgment entry.

The Court will retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the settlement between the parties, if necessary.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

_________________

Thomas M. Rose, Judge

United States District Court


Summaries of

Caplinger v. Farley

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION
Jan 25, 2013
Case No. 3:12-CV-97 (S.D. Ohio Jan. 25, 2013)
Case details for

Caplinger v. Farley

Case Details

Full title:CAROL CAPLINGER et al. , Plaintiffs, v. WHITFIELD FARLEY, III et al.…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

Date published: Jan 25, 2013

Citations

Case No. 3:12-CV-97 (S.D. Ohio Jan. 25, 2013)