McCoy v. Alameda County et al

Filing 30

NOTICE REGARDING DISMISSAL OF CLAIMS re 29 Stipulation, filed by Alameda County Sheriff's Department, Stuart E. Barnes, N. Gonzalgo, Arthur McCoy, Gregory Ahern, Alameda County, B. Baker, Erich D. Marapao. Signed by Judge Alsup on November 18, 2011. (whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/18/2011)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 8 ARTHUR MCCOY, 9 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 No. C 11-01569 WHA Plaintiff, v. NOTICE REGARDING DISMISSAL OF CLAIMS 13 ALAMEDA COUNTY, a municipal corporation; B. BARKER; ERICH D. MARAPAO; N. GONZALGO; STUART BARNES; and DOES 1–25, inclusive, 14 Defendants. 12 / 15 16 The parties filed a stipulation to dismiss under FRCP 41(A)(1) claims 6 (negligence) and 7 17 (breach of duty to supervise, train and discipline) in plaintiff’s amended complaint (Dkt. No. 29). 18 Our court of appeals has held that a plaintiff may not use Rule 41(a)(1) to dismiss one or more but 19 less than all of several claims. Hells Canyon Preservation Council v. U.S. Forest Service, 20 403 F.3d 683, 687–688 (9th Cir. 2005). “Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) is the appropriate 21 mechanism [w]here a plaintiff desires to eliminate an issue, or one or more but less than all of 22 several claims, but without dismissing as to any of the defendants.” id. at 688. According, the 23 purported dismissal was invalid. The parties instead should file a motion for leave to amend 24 the complaint 25 26 27 28 Dated: November 18, 2011. WILLIAM ALSUP 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?