Williams et al v. Bryan County et al

Filing 51

ORDER dismissing as moot 36 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; granting 39 Motion to Dismiss; dismissing as moot 44 Motion for Summary Judgment; dismissing as moot 45 Motion for Summary Judgment. The Clerk is directed to close this case. Signed by Judge William T. Moore, Jr. on 09/10/2010. (lmm)

Williams et al v. Bryan County et al

Doc. 51

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA SAVANNAH DIVISION TOMMY LEE WILLIAMS, HENRIETTA) WILLIAMS, LAQUANA BENIMAN,) BRIAN JAMAR WILLIAMS, DEWAYNE) JERMAINE WILLIAMS, and) LATREKA M. EDWARDS, Plaintiffs,

HL-O U.S.OISTR1CT COURT SAVANNAH DIV.

2010 SEP 10 AM ii : 51
CLERK SO. 01ST. OF GA.

V.
BRYAN COUNTY, a Political Subdivision of the State of Georgia; CITY OF PEMBROKE, a Political Subdivision of the State of Georgia; SHERIFF CLYDE SMITH, Individually and as Sheriff of Bryan County; MARK CROWE, Individually, as a Deputy Sheriff of Bryan County, and as the Chief of Police of Pembroke Police Department; CLEVE WHITE, Individually, as a Deputy Sheriff of Bryan County, and as a Police Officer of the ) Pembroke Police Department; and SUSAN CARRINGTON, Individually and as a Deputy Sheriff of Bryan County, Defendants.

CASE NO. CV409-107

ORDER Before the Court is Plaintiffs' Motion to Dismiss. (Doc. 39.) Defendants have filed a response. (Doc. 42.) In the motion, Plaintiffs request that, pursuant to Federal

Dockets.Justia.com

Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a) (2),' this Court dismiss with prejudice Plaintiffs' only claims in this case--those arising under the Fourteenth Amendment. (Doc. 40 at 3.) In addition, Plaintiffs ask that 11 [a]ll other claims of any kind should be dismissed without prejudice." (Id.) Defendants agree that Plaintiffs have only alleged claims under the Fourteenth Amendment and do not object to the Court dismissing these claims with prejudice. 1-2.) (Doc. 42 at

Therefore, Plaintiffs' motion is GRANTED and this

case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. To the extent Plaintiff seeks to dismiss "[a]ll other claims of any kind . . . without prejudice" (Doc. 40 at 3), the Court is confused by this request. it is, of course, axiomatic that the Court lacks the power to dismiss claims that have not been presented to it for adjudication. According to their briefs, all parties agree that Plaintiffs only raised claims under the Fourteenth Amendment, which the Court has dismissed at Plaintiffs' request. Therefore, the Court is unable to dismiss "ja]ll other claims of any kind" (Id.), without prejudice or

' Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41 (a) (2), an action may be dismissed at the plaintiff's request only by court order, on terms that the court considers proper." 2

otherwise
case.

.2

The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to close this

SO ORDERED this /Oday of September 2010.

1
WILLIAM T. MOORE, JR.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

The Court takes no position on whether Plaintiffs' decision to voluntarily dismiss their Fourteenth Amendment claims with prejudice affects their ability to later bring any other claims stemming from the alleged actions of Defendants that formed the basis of their claims in this case. Defendants' Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. 36) and Motions for Summary Judgment (Docs. 44, 45) are
DISMISSED AS MOOT.

2

3