Musa, Akeem v. Kabul, Inc. et al

Filing 23

ORDER denying plaintiff Akeem Musa's 20 Rule 41(a)(2) motion. Signed by District Judge James D. Peterson on 9/9/2016. (jef),(ps)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

AKEEM MUSA,
Plaintiff,
v.
KABUL, INC. and HAMED ZAFARI,

ORDER
15-cv-804-jdp

Defendants.
Plaintiff Akeem Musa seeks unpaid wages from defendants. Defendant Kabul, Inc. is a
corporation operating a restaurant in Madison, Wisconsin. Defendant Hamed Zafari is the
owner of Kabul. Kabul is unrepresented. Zafari is pro se.1
Musa moves under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2) to dismiss Zafari from the
action without prejudice. Dkt. 20. Plaintiff’s strategy is apparent: drop Zafari and the
corporation Kabul is a sitting duck for default judgment.
Rule 41(a)(2) allows a plaintiff to dismiss “an action” on “terms that the court
considers proper.” In the Seventh Circuit, Rule 41(a) is not the proper procedural vehicle to
drop a party from an action. As the Seventh Circuit has explained, “Rule 41(a) does not
speak of dismissing one claim in a suit; it speaks of dismissing an action—which is to say, the
whole case.” Taylor v. Brown, 787 F.3d 851, 857 (7th Cir. 2015). Because Musa seeks
dismissal of one party and not the entire action, I will deny Musa’s motion. The proper
procedural vehicle here is Rule 15(a), which would allow Musa to amend his complaint and
1

The court has advised Kabul numerous times since January 2016 that Kabul must retain
counsel to appear in this case because Kabul is a corporation, and that failure to retain
counsel can result in a default judgment against Kabul. Dkt. 6; Dkt. 8; Dkt. 16; Dkt. 18.
Kabul is still unrepresented. The court held a pretrial conference on June 7, 2016, but neither
defendant attended the conference.

drop a party. Id. at 858. Musa may file a proposed amended complaint and concurrently
move for leave to amend his complaint.

ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff Akeem Musa’s Rule 41(a)(2) motion, Dkt. 20, is
DENIED.

Entered September 9, 2016.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
________________________________________
JAMES D. PETERSON
District Judge

2