Pleus v. ARP FAMILY FARMS, an Arizona general partnership et al
Filing
69
ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 62 Plaintiff's Emergency Motion for Voluntary Dismissal is GRANTED. This case is dismissed against the remaining defendants without prejudice and without an award of fees or costs. The Clerk of Court is ordered to close the case. Signed by Judge Richard F. Boulware, II on 1/16/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
3
***
4
5
6
ALBERT H. PLEUS,
7
Plaintiff,
8
9
v.
Case No. 2:15-cv-02093-RFB-NJK
ORDER
ARP FAMILY FARMS et al.,
10
11
Defendants.
12
13
14
15
I.
16
17
INTRODUCTION
Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion for Voluntary Dismissal (ECF No. 62)
without prejudice based upon Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a). The Court grants the Motion
18
19
20
and dismisses this case without prejudice and without ordering fees and costs.
II.
DISCUSSION
21
The Plaintiff has moved for voluntary dismissal pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2) against the
22
remaining Defendants in this action – ARP Family Farms; Ephesians 3:20 Farms; Proverbs 31
23
Farms, LLC; Circle 191 Farms, LLC; San Tan Agriculture, LLC; and Nathan W. Arp (the
24
25
“Remaining Defendants”). Rule 41(a)(2) permits a plaintiff to seek voluntary dismissal of an
26
action without prejudice from the district court. Id. “The purpose of the rule is to permit a plaintiff
27
to dismiss an action without prejudice so long as the defendant will not be prejudiced, . . . or
28
1
unfairly affected by the dismissal.” Stevedoring Services of America v. Armilla Int'l B.V., 889
2
F.2d 919, 921 (9th Cir. 1989).
3
4
The Court finds it appropriate to dismiss this case without prejudice and without requiring
5
the Plaintiff to pay fees and costs. The Court finds that Remaining Defendants will not suffer
6
prejudice and they have not raised a significant issue of prejudice. There has been no discovery
7
8
in this case beyond initial disclosures and the setting of a discovery schedule. The Remaining
9
Defendants do not oppose dismissal. The Court therefore will dismiss this case without prejudice.
10
The Remaining Defendants have requested that the Court ordered the payment of
11
reasonable attorneys fees and costs as a condition precedent to the dismissal of this action. The
12
Remaining Defendants assert that if the action is filed anew, they will have to pay additional
13
14
attorneys fees and costs for the new action. The Court rejects the Remaining Defendants’ request.
15
First, given the nature of this case, it is not clear to the Court that any new action by Plaintiff would
16
be substantially different than the facts alleged in this case. The Court finds that the Remaining
17
Defendants can and could continue to benefit from the legal counsel they received in this case
18
regarding the causes of action alleged against them. Second, the litigation has not progressed in a
19
20
significant or substantial manner, so the Court does not find that the Remaining Defendants had to
21
pay for significant legal advice and related costs. While there had been an exchange of initial
22
disclosures, discovery in this case had not actually commenced. Finally, the Court cannot
23
adequately determine whether there is a likelihood or not that the Plaintiff could prevail on its
24
claims against the Remaining Defendants.
Considering all of these factors, the Court does not
25
26
27
find that the award of fees and costs would be appropriate as a condition precedent to the granting
of a voluntary dismissal without prejudice.
28
-2-
1
2
3
III.
CONCLUSION
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion for Voluntary Dismissal
(ECF No. 62) is GRANTED. This case is dismissed against the remaining defendants without
4
5
prejudice and without an award of fees or costs. The Clerk of Court is ordered to close the case.
6
7
DATED this 16th day of January, 2018.
8
9
____________________________________
RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-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?