Clay v. Lark LLC

United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia

Clay v. Lark LLC

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA SAVANNAH DIVISION

ROSHEIKA CLAY,

Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO.: 4:24-cv-95

v.

LARK LLC d/b/a Ontrack Staffing; and DOREL HOME FURNISHINGS, INC.,

Defendants.

O RDE R On September 26, 2024, counsel for Plaintiff and counsel for Defendants, Lark LLC and Dorel Home Furnishings, Inc., advised the Court that the parties have reached a settlement of this matter and that they intend to dismiss the case once the settlement documentation is finalized.1 (Doc. 54.) Accordingly, the Court DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSE this action. See Heape v. Flanagan, No. 6:07-CV-12,

2008 WL 2439736

(S.D. Ga. June 9, 2008). Within forty-five (45) days of the date this Order is entered, the parties—if they wish— may present a dismissal judgment, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2),

1 The docket for this case indicates that Ricardo Reid remains a defendant in this case. Plaintiff, however, filed (with leave of Court) an Amended Complaint dropping Mr. Reid from the case. (See doc. 52.) Accordingly, the Court DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to UPDATE the docket to indicate that Mr. Reid was terminated as Defendant on September 20, 2024, when the Amended Complaint was filed. incorporating the terms of their settlement, so the Court may retain jurisdiction to enforce the agreement. In the alternative, the parties may simply file a joint stipulation of dismissal. If the parties fail to file a dismissal (or, if necessary, move to reopen the case) within forty-five (45) days, the Court will sua sponte dismiss the case with prejudice. Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am.,

511 U.S. 375, 381-82

(1994). SO ORDERED, this 7th day of October, 2024. f S pe L yA

R. STAN BAKER, CHIEF JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

Reference

Status
Unknown