Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
Kramer Green Zuckerman Greene & Buchsbaum
-
Order | Filed: May 08, 2024 | Entered: May 08, 2024 ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY v. HEADHUNTER, INC.
Personal Property: Other | Florida Southern
Order Dismissing/Closing Case or Party
PAPERLESS ORDER DISMISSING CASE without prejudice. Upon review of the Mediator's Report 44 , filed on May 7, 2024, indicating that the Parties have settled this action, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that this action is DISMISSED without prejudice, all pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT, and the case is now CLOSED. Within fourteen (14) days from the date of this Order and upon the filing of a stipulation of dismissal with prejudice or the filing of an appropriate joint motion and a fully-executed Settlement Agreement, the Court may amend this Order to dismiss the above-captioned action with prejudice, to approve the settlement if filed, and/or to retain jurisdiction over the Agreement. The Parties are advised that the Court does not retain jurisdiction over a settlement agreement without the Parties having filed the settlement agreement with the Court and, absent good cause, the Court does not review proposed settlement agreements for approval in camera. This entry constitutes the PAPERLESS ORDER in its entirety. Signed by Judge Joan A. Lenard on 5/8/2024. (tbe)
-
ADR | Filed: May 07, 2024 | Entered: May 07, 2024 ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY v. HEADHUNTER, INC.
Personal Property: Other | Florida Southern
Mediation Report
FINAL MEDIATION REPORT by Mediator Michael P. Essington. Disposition: Settled in full. Mediation held/partially held via video-conference. Filed by Michael P. Essington.(Essington, Michael)
-
Order | Filed: April 29, 2024 | Entered: April 29, 2024 ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY v. HEADHUNTER, INC.
Personal Property: Other | Florida Southern
Order on Motion for Extension of Time
PAPERLESS ORDER denying Defendant's 42 Motion for Additional Time to Serve Third Party Subpoena. Defendant seeks an open-ended extension of time within which to serve the subpoena because, after multiple attempts, service on this third-party has not yet been effectuated. The attachments to the Motion reveal that the most recent such attempt was made more than three weeks ago. (ECF No. 42-4). Plaintiff does not oppose the relief sought but does oppose any extension of the discovery period, which closes on April 30, 2024.
Pursuant to the Southern District of Florida Local Rule 26.1(d), "subpoenas seeking the production of documents must be served in sufficient time that the response is due on or before the discovery cutoff date." S.D. Fla. L.R. 26.1(d) (emphasis added). Service of the subject subpoena at this point would not comply with the Local Rule because respondent must be afforded a reasonable time to comply. Accordingly, Defendant's Motion for Additional Time to Serve Third Party Subpoena is DENIED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lauren Fleischer Louis on 4/29/2024. (sag)
Stay ahead of the curve
In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.
- Archive of over 450,000 articles
- Database of over 2.1 million cases
- 62,000+ organization-specific pages.
- Daily and real-time news and case alerts on organizations, industries, and customized search queries.
- Significant legal events involving law firms, companies, industries, and government agencies.
- Learn more
TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS
Already a subscriber? Click here to login