Aurora Fraternal Order of the Eagles & Auxiliary Aurora v. Travelers Property Casualty Company of America et al

Filing 58

MINUTE ORDER. The case was dismissed with prejudice as of the entry of the parties' Stipulation for Dismissal With Prejudice. No order of dismissal is necessary by Judge Philip A. Brimmer on 06/19/15. (jhawk, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 14-cv-01726-PAB-MJW
AURORA FRATERNAL ORDER OF THE EAGLES & AUXILIARY AURORA,
Plaintiff,
v.
THE PHOENIX INSURANCE COMPANY,
Defendant.
_____________________________________________________________________
MINUTE ORDER
_____________________________________________________________________
Entered by Judge Philip A. Brimmer
This matter is before the Court on the Stipulation for Dismissal With Prejudice
[Docket No. 57]. 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 defendant Travelers Property Casualty Company
of America and defendant The Phoenix Insurance Company are represented by the
same counsel and there is no reason to suspect that T ravelers would object to the
stipulation. As a result, the Court finds 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’ Stipulation for Dismissal
With Prejudice. No order of dismissal is necessary.
DATED June 19, 2015.