William Lawson et al v. Lydig Construction, Inc.

Filing 48

MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS): ORDER PLAINTIFFS MOTION TO VOLUNTARILY DISMISS JACQUELINE LAWSON (Dkt. No. 45, filed April 28, 2015) by Judge Christina A. Snyder: Because it does not appear thatthe defendant will be prejudiced by the requested dismissal, the Court GRANTS the motion to dismiss Jacqueline Lawson and her claims for loss of consortium from the instant action. 45 . Terminating Jacqueline Lawson. (pj)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

‘O’

Case No.

2:14-cv-02874-CAS(JCGx)

Title

WILLIAM LAWSON, ET AL. v. LYDIG CONSTRUCTION, INC.

Present: The Honorable

Date

June 2, 2015

CHRISTINA A. SNYDER

Catherine Jeang
Deputy Clerk

Not Present
Court Reporter / Recorder

N/A
Tape No.

Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs:

Attorneys Present for Defendants:

Not Present

Not Present

Proceedings:

(In Chambers) PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO VOLUNTARILY
DISMISS JACQUELINE LAWSON (Dkt. No. 45, filed April 28,
2015)

The Court finds this motion appropriate for decision without oral argument. See
Fed. R. Civ. P. 78; C.D. Cal. Local Rule 7-15. Accordingly, the hearing date of June 15,
2015, is vacated, and the matter is hereby taken under submission.
On October 16, 2013, William Lawson and Jacqueline Lawson filed this lawsuit in
the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois against Lydig
Construction, Inc. Dkt. No. 1. William Lawson alleges claims for negligence and
premises liability stemming from an accident that occurred while he was working on a
construction project, and Jacqueline Lawson alleges two claims for loss of consortium.
See generally id. The case was transferred to this district on April 9, 2014. Dkt. No. 18.
On April 28, 2015, counsel for plaintiffs filed a motion to dismiss Jacqueline Lawson
from this lawsuit pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2). Dkt. No. 45. The
motion represents that the two plaintiffs, who were married when the accident giving rise
to this lawsuit occurred, have since separated, and that Jacqueline Lawson has filed for
divorce and requests to be dismissed from this lawsuit. See generally id. No opposition
has been filed.1
The purpose of Rule 41(a)(2) “is to permit a plaintiff to dismiss an action without
prejudice so long as the defendant will not be prejudiced.” Stevedoring Servs. of Am. v.
1

Pursuant to this Court’s Local Rules, opposition papers are due no later than
twenty-one days before the date designated for the hearing of the motion, which in this
instance was May 25, 2015. C.D. Cal. L.R. 7-9.
CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Date

‘O’

Case No.

2:14-cv-02874-CAS(JCGx)

June 2, 2015

Title

WILLIAM LAWSON, ET AL. v. LYDIG CONSTRUCTION, INC.

Armilla Int’l, B.V., 889 F.2d 919, 921 (9th Cir. 1989). Because it does not appear that
the defendant will be prejudiced by the requested dismissal, the Court GRANTS the
motion to dismiss Jacqueline Lawson and her claims for loss of consortium from the
instant action.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
00
Initials of Preparer

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

:

00

CMJ

Page 2 of 2