Turpitt v. Riverbank Housing Authority et al
Filing
25
ORDER Directing Clerk of Court to Administratively Update Docket signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 1/26/2015. U.S. Postal Service (as cross-defendant) and Daryl A. Trujillo (as defendant and cross-defendant) terminated. (Jessen, A)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
RIVERBANK HOUSING AUTHORITY, et. )
)
al.,
)
)
)
Defendants,
)
)
)
_____________________________________ )
)
HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF )
)
RIVERBANK,
)
Cross-Complainant,
)
)
)
)
vs.
)
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al.,
)
)
Cross-Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
SHARON TURPITT,
28
Page 1
No. 1:14-cv-00602---SKO
ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF
COURT TO ADMINISTRATIVELY
UPDATE DOCKET
1
On January 22, 2015, Defendant and Cross-Defendant United States of America filed a
2
stipulation between the U.S. and Cross-Complainant Housing Authority of the City of
3
Riverbank that the cross-complainant's claims against the United States Postal Service be
4
dismissed with prejudice, each party to bear its own costs, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil
5
Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). Moreover, the United States noted that it is now the sole cross-
6
defendant on the cross-complaint, having substituted into the action in place of Daryl A.
7
Trujillo.
8
9
In relevant part, Rule 41(a)(1)(A) provides as follows:
11
[A] plaintiff may dismiss an action with a court order by filing: (i) a notice of
dismissal before the opposing party serves either an answer or a motion for
summary judgment; or (ii) a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who
have appeared.
12
Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A). Rule 41 thus allows the parties to dismiss an action voluntarily,
13
after service of an answer, by filing a written stipulation to dismiss signed by all of the parties
14
who have appeared, although an oral stipulation in open court will also suffice. See Eitel v.
15
McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1472-73 (9th Cir. 1986).
10
16
Once the stipulation between the parties who have appeared is properly filed or made in
17
open court, no order of the court is necessary to effectuate dismissal. Caselaw concerning
18
stipulated dismissals under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) is clear that the entry of such a stipulation of
19
dismissal is effective automatically and does not require judicial approval. Commercial Space
20
Mgmt. Co. v. Boeing Co., 193 F.3d 1074, 1077 (9th Cir. 1999). "The plaintiff may dismiss
21
some or all of the defendants, or some or all of his claims, through a Rule 41(a)(1) notice," and
22
the dismissal "automatically terminates the action as to the defendants who are the subjects of
23
the notice." Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997).
24
Because the parties have filed a stipulation for dismissal of cross-defendant United
25
States Postal Service under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), the United States Postal Service is no longer a
26
cross-defendant. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii).
27
Accordingly IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court update the docket
28
to reflect that (1) the United States Postal Service is no longer a cross-defendant, and (2) Daryl
Page 2
1
Trujillo is no longer a defendant or cross-defendant as the United States substituted into the
2
action in his place on December 24, 2014.
3
4
5
6
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
January 26, 2015
/s/ Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Page 3
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?