Metcalf v. Agee et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION Signed by Chief Judge Karon O Bowdre on 7/8/16. (SAC )
2016 Jul-08 AM 10:40
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
IVAN QUINTEL METCALF,
CAPTAIN MIKE AGEE, et al.,
Civil Action Number:
Plaintiff Ivan Quintel Metcalf, acting through counsel, has filed a document
styled as a “Stipulation for Dismissal with Prejudice,” advising that the remaining
parties have reached a settlement. (Doc. 54). However, a “stipulation of
dismissal” must be signed by each of the relevant parties, on both sides of the
ledger. See FED. R. CIV. P. 41 (a)(1)(A)(ii). The instant filing is signed only by
Plaintiff’s counsel, not defense counsel. (Doc. 54 at 1). And while a plaintiff may
also file a voluntary “notice of dismissal” that is operative without a court order,
he may only do so before the opposing party has served either an answer or a
motion for summary judgment. See FED. R. CIV. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i). Here, the
Plaintiff’s instant filing was preceded by a motion for summary judgment. (See
Docs. 20, 21, 30, 31, 39, 44). Accordingly, Plaintiff’s filing itself is not operative
to dismiss the action without a court order under either Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) or (ii).
Nonetheless, an action may be otherwise dismissed at the plaintiff’s request
by a court order, on terms that the court considers proper. FED. R. CIV. P. 41(a)(2).
Here, Plaintiff’s filing expressly acknowledges that he is amenable at this time to
an unconditional dismissal with prejudice. Accordingly, the court will treat
Plaintiff’s “Stipulation of Dismissal with Prejudice” as a motion for a voluntary
dismissal with prejudice under Rule 41(a)(2). The court, discerning no unfair
prejudice to any party, concludes that the motion (doc. 54) is due to be
The court will enter a separate Final Order.
DONE and ORDERED this 8th day of July, 2016.
KARON OWEN BOWDRE
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?