Allstate Vehicle and Property Insurance Company v. Richardson

Opinion

FILED IN THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON Dec 06, 2024 SEAN F. MCAVOY, CLERK ALLSTATE VEHICLE AND PROPERTY No. 4:24-CV-00308-MKD INSRUANCE COMPANY, ORDER DENYING STIPULATION Plaintiff, OF PARTIAL DISMISSAL OF D.R. vs. ECF No. 25 JEREMY RICHARDSON, individually and as Guardian of D.R., a minor; ANDY LOUIE and CHERYL LOUIE, a married couple, each individually and their marital community comprised thereof,

Defendants.

Before the Court is parties’ Stipulation of Partial Dismissal of D.R. ECF No. 25. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A), a plaintiff may dismiss an action without court order by filing: (i) a notice of dismissal before the opposing party serves either an answer or a motion for summary judgment; or (ii) a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared. See also Van Leeuwen v. Bank of Am., N.A., 304 F.R.D. 691, 697 (D. Utah 2015) ( “Rule 41(a) ‘allow[s] the dismissal of all claims against one defendant, so that a defendant may be dismissed from the entire action[.]’” (quoting Hells Canyon Pres. Council v. United States Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 687 (9th Cir.2005)). Under LCivR 41(a)(1)(A), a

voluntary dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1) must also “contain a statement that no answer or motion for summary judgment has been served.” Plaintiff’s Voluntary Dismissal does not contain a statement regarding

whether an answer or motion for summary judgment has been served. See ECF No. 25 at 1. An Answer was filed in this case on October 10, 2024, by Defendant Richardson. Thus, Plaintiff cannot dismiss this action under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i).

Further, the dismissal is not signed by all parties who have appeared. Specifically, the dismissal has not been signed by Defendant Andy Louie who appeared pro se at the scheduling conference on November 21, 2024.1 Therefore,

it does not meet the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED: 1. Plaintiff’s Voluntary Dismissal, ECF No. 25, is DENIED with to leave to refil e in compliance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) or (a)(2).

IT IS SO ORDERED. The District Court Executive is directed to file this 1 The other pro se Defendant in this case, Cheryl Louie, has not yet made an

appearance. Order, provide copies to counsel. DATED December 6, 2024.

s/Mary K. Dimke MARY K. DIMKE