Mott et al v. Narconon Fresh Start et al

Filing 99

Minute Order. The case was dismissed with prejudice as of the entry of the parties' Stipulated Dismissal 98 . No order of dismissal is necessary. Entered by Judge Philip A. Brimmer on 07/15/15. (jhawk, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge Philip A. Brimmer Civil Action No. 14-cv-01293-PAB-KMT BRYAN MOTT, a New York citizen, and NIKKI MOTT, a New York citizen, Plaintiffs, v. NARCONON FRESH START, d/b/a A Life Worth Saving, Inc., Defendant. _____________________________________________________________________ ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE _____________________________________________________________________ This matter is before the Court on the Stipulated Dismissal of Defendant Narconon Fresh Start With Prejudice [Docket No. 98]. The parties request that the Court enter an order dismissing this action with prejudice. The stipulation invokes Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), which provides that the “plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by filing: . . . a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared.” (emphasis added). The stipulation was not signed “by all parties who have appeared” (Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii); see Anderson-Tully Co. v. Federal Ins. Co., 347 F. App’x 171, 176 (6th Cir. 2009) (under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), “all parties who have appeared” includes both current and former parties)) and therefore does not, by itself, serve to dismiss this action. However, former defendants Association for Better Living and Education International and Narconon International and def endant Narconon Fresh Start are represented by the same counsel, and there is no reason to suspect that the former defendants would object to the stipulation. As a result, the Court f inds that dismissal is appropriate. Furthermore, “[u]nless the notice or stipulation states otherwise, the dismissal is without prejudice.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(B) (emphasis added). Here, however, the parties have agreed to the dismissal of this action with prejudice. Therefore, the case was dismissed with prejudice as of the entry of the parties’ Stipulated Dismissal [Docket No. 98]. No order of dismissal is necessary. DATED July 15, 2015.

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?