Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00522/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00522-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Page 1 of 2

BEVERLY DOVE v. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al. USDC, Eastern District, Case No. CIV S-04-522 LKK/DAD

VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL BY STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

LAW OFFICE OF MARK E. MERIN

Mark E. Merin, SBN 043849

Jeffrey I. Schwarzschild, SBN 192086 

2001 P Street, Suite 100

Sacramento, CA 95814

Telephone: 916/443-6911

Facsimile: 916/447-8336

E-Mail: mark@markmerin.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff

SAMUEL L. JACKSON CITY ATTORNEY

CITY OF SACRAMENTO

Gerald C. Hicks, Sr. Deputy City Atty

915 I Street, Room 4010

Sacramento, CA 95814

Telephone: 916/808-5346

Facsimile: 916/808-7455

E-Mail: ghicks@cityofsacramento.org

Attorneys for Defendants

—o0o—

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

—o0o—

BEVERLY DOVE,

Plaintiff,

vs.

CITY OF SACRAMENTO, CHIEF OF

POLICE ALBERT NAJERA, BOBBY

DANIELS, JASON MARCH, and DOES III

through XXX, inclusive,

Defendants.

CASE NO: CIV.S-04-522 LKK/DAD

VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL BY

STIPULATION [FRCP Rule 41(a)]

AND ORDER

COMPLAINT FILED: June 14, 2004

TRIAL DATE: July 31, 2006

\\\

\\\

\\\

\\\

\\\

\\\

Case 2:04-cv-00522-LKK -DAD Document 67 Filed 05/10/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Page 2 of 2

BEVERLY DOVE v. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al. USDC, Eastern District, Case No. CIV S-04-522 LKK/DAD

VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL BY STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

F:\WPWORK\MCNULTY\PLEADING\COMPLAIN.DOC

The parties to the above-captioned matter, having resolved their differences in a mutually

satisfactory manner, pursuant to Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules ofCivil Procedure, hereby stipulate

to dismissal with prejudice of this action in its entirety, each party to bear their own attorney’s fees

and costs.

DATED: May 10, 2006 Respectfully submitted,

LAW OFFICE OF MARK E. MERIN

/s/ - “Jeffrey I. Schwarzschild”

 

JEFFREY I. SCHWARZSCHILD

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Dated: May 10, 2006 Respectfully submitted,

SAMUEL L. JACKSON CITY ATTORNEY

CITY OF SACRAMENTO

/s/ - “Gerald C. Hicks”

 

GERALD C. HICKS

Sr. Deputy City Attorney

Attorneys for Defendants CITY OF SACRAMENTO

CHIEF OF POLICE ALBERT NAJERA, BOBBY 

DANIELS and JASON MARCH

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter may be, and it hereby is, dismissed with

prejudice, in its entirety, each party to bear their own attorney’s fees and costs.

DATED: May 10, 2006.

/s/Lawrence K. Karlton 

LAWRENCE K. KARLTON

Senior Judge

United States District Court

G:\DOCS\KAR\DKAR1\ORDERS\04cv522.dismiss.0510.wpd

Case 2:04-cv-00522-LKK -DAD Document 67 Filed 05/10/06 Page 2 of 2