1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. TUCKER v. MILLER & STEENO, P.C.
 

TUCKER v. MILLER & STEENO, P.C.

No. 13-cv-861-DRH.

DOUGLAS K. TUCKER, for himself and others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. MILLER & STEENO, P.C., Defendants.

United States District Court, S.D. Illinois.

August 13, 2014.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Douglas K Tucker, for himself and others similarly situated, Plaintiff, represented by Daniel A. Edelman , Edelman, Combs et al. & Thomas E. Soule , Edelman, Combs et al..

Miller & Steeno, P.C., Defendant, represented by Stephen J. Barber , Miller and Steeno, P.C..

ORDER

DAVID R. HERNDON, District Judge.

Having been advised by counsel for the parties that the above action has been settled but that additional time is needed to consummate settlement, the Court DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to enter judgment of dismissal with prejudice and without costs 60 days from the date of this Order. Should the parties fail to consummate settlement within 60 days, they may petition the Court...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases