Cherry v. Social Security Administration Commissioner

Filing 25

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Honorable Barry A. Bryant on March 24, 2017. (lw)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS HOT SPRINGS DIVISION PATTY ANNE CHERRY v. PLAINTIFF Civil No. 6:16-cv-06067 COMMISSIONER, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION DEFENDANT MEMORANDUM OPINION On March 17, 2017, Patty Anne Cherry (“Plaintiff”) filed this Motion For Nonsuit. ECF No. 23. According to Plaintiff, she longer wishes to pursue his appeal, and requests dismissal. Id. Defendant responded and although they have no objection to the dismissal, they request the dismissal be with prejudice based on the number of extensions Plaintiff requested to file her brief. ECF No. 24. The parties have consented to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge to conduct any and all proceedings in this case, including conducting the trial, ordering the entry of a final judgment, and conducting all post-judgment proceedings. ECF No. 10. Pursuant to this authority, the Court issues this memorandum opinion and orders the entry of a final judgment in this matter. Absent any pending counterclaims, a court is authorized to dismiss a case at the Plaintiff’s request on the terms that the court considers proper. FED. R. CIV. P. 41(a)(2). Defendant has asserted no counterclaims and has not objected to this motion, other than to request the dismissal be with prejudice. Defendant’s request that the dismissal be with prejudice is based on the fact the Plaintiff received numerous extensions in which to file her appeal brief. However, it should be noted Defendant had no objection to the requests for extensions sought by Plaintiff. After taking into consideration said Motion, the Court finds the Plaintiff’s motion (ECF No. 23) should be GRANTED and Plaintiff’s case be dismissed without prejudice. ENTERED this 24th day of March, 2017. /s/ Barry A. Bryant HON. BARRY A. BRYANT U.S. MAGISTRATE 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?