From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Vincent v. Fifth Third Bank

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION
Apr 24, 2013
Case No. 3:12-CV-306 (S.D. Ohio Apr. 24, 2013)

Opinion

Case No. 3:12-CV-306

04-24-2013

ERIC D. VINCENT et al, Plaintiffs, v. FIFTH THIRD BANK, Defendant.


District Judge Thomas M. Rose


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

Vincent v. Fifth Third Bank

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION
Apr 24, 2013
Case No. 3:12-CV-306 (S.D. Ohio Apr. 24, 2013)
Case details for

Vincent v. Fifth Third Bank

Case Details

Full title:ERIC D. VINCENT et al, Plaintiffs, v. FIFTH THIRD BANK, Defendant.

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

Date published: Apr 24, 2013

Citations

Case No. 3:12-CV-306 (S.D. Ohio Apr. 24, 2013)