Kuhnen v. Remington et al
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The Magistrate Judge recommends that the motion for order of dismissal with prejudice (Docket Entry 71) be granted. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joe Brown on 7/26/2017. (xc:Pro se party by regular mail. ) (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(eh)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
DARREN REMINGTON; SUSAN GANN,
THE HONORABLE ALETA A. TRAUGER
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Presently pending is a joint motion by the Plaintiff and
Defendant Gann to dismiss all claims by the Plaintiff against her
(Docket Entry 7).
No opposition to the motion has been filed by the
remaining Defendant Remington. Accordingly, the Magistrate Judge
recommends that the motion be granted and the claims against the
Defendant Gann be dismissed with prejudice in accordance with the
Under Rule 41(a)(1) a plaintiff may dismiss a case
without a court order before the opposing party serves either an
answer or a motion for summary judgment, or with a stipulation of
dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared. In this case
since the Defendant Gann has appeared and has filed an affidavit
agreeing to the dismissal, it appears that under either section of
Rule 41(a)(1) a dismissal without court order would be appropriate.
Even if a court order is required it appears that there is no
reason not to grant the dismissal with prejudice.
The remaining Defendant Remington was apparently served
on June 7, 2017 (Docket Entry 6). However, he has not filed any
appearance in this matter and may be subject to a motion for
default by the Plaintiff. If the Plaintiff requests a default
against Defendant Remington, he should comply with Rule 55 and
accompany any such motion with an appropriate certificate showing
Defendant is not in the armed services. Generally,
a request to
necessary information about current military service.
recommends that the motion for order of dismissal with prejudice
(Docket Entry 71) be granted.
Under Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,
Recommendation in which to file any written objections to this
Recommendation with the District Court. Any party opposing said
objections shall have 14 days from receipt of any objections filed
in this Report in which to file any responses to said objections.
Failure to file specific objections within 14 days of receipt of
this Report and Recommendation can constitute a waiver of further
appeal of this Recommendation. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 106 S.
Ct. 466, 88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985), Reh’g denied, 474 U.S. 1111 (1986).
ENTER this 26th day of July, 2017.
Joe B. Brown
JOE B. BROWN
United States Magistrate 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?