BRYANT v. CARRILLO

Case No. 1:17-cv-00311-DAD-SAB.

RACHEL BRYANT, Plaintiff, v. ELEAZAR CARRILLO, et al., Defendants.

United States District Court, E.D. California.

Editors Note
Applicable Law: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
Cause: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 Americans with Disabilities Act
Nature of Suit: 446 Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other
Source: PACER


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Rachel Bryant, Plaintiff, represented by Tanya E. Moore , Mission Law Firm, P.C..

Rachel Bryant, Plaintiff, represented by Zachary Best , Mission Law Firm, P.C..

Eleazar Carrillo, Defendant, represented by Rachelle Taylor Golden , Overstreet & Associates.

Norma Carrillo, Defendant, represented by Rachelle Taylor Golden , Overstreet & Associates.

Martha L. Limata, Defendant, represented by Donald Richard Forbes , Helon and Manfredo.


ORDER RE NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL

(ECF No. 13)

STANLEY A. BOONE, Magistrate Judge.

On May 23, 2017, Plaintiff filed a notice of settlement informing the Court that the parties have reached settlement resolving this action. (ECF No. 11.) On May 24, 2017, the Court ordered the parties to file dispositional documents on or before June 23, 2017. (ECF No. 12.) On June 8, 2017, Plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal, in which Plaintiff seeks to dismiss this action with prejudice in its entirety pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i). (ECF No. 13.)

"[U]nder Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i), `a plaintiff has an absolute right to voluntarily dismiss his action prior to service by the defendant of an answer or a motion for summary judgment.'" Commercial Space Mgmt. Co., Inc. v. Boeing Co., Inc., 193 F.3d 1074, 1077 (9th Cir. 1999) (quoting Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997)).

However, in this action, all defendants have filed answers. (ECF Nos. 9, 10.) Therefore, Plaintiff cannot voluntarily dismiss this action pursuant to Rule 41(A)(1)(A)(i).

Plaintiff can dismiss this action without a court order pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), which provides that a "plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by filing a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared."

Plaintiff can seek to dismiss this action by court order pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2), which permits a plaintiff to dismiss an action pursuant to a court order and on terms that the court considers proper. A motion for voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a)(2) is addressed to the sound discretion of the district court. Hamilton v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. Inc., 679 F.2d 143, 145 (9th Cir. 1982).

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that the parties shall file dispositional documents in compliance with the Court's May 24, 2017 order on or before June 23, 2017.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Comment

1000 Characters Remaining

Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

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