Allstate Vehicle and Property Insurance Company v. Richardson

• Court: District Court, E.D. Washington
• Decided: December 6, 2024
• Docket: 2:24-cv-00308
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 FILED IN THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 3 Dec 06, 2024 4 SEAN F. MCAVOY, CLERK 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 7 ALLSTATE VEHICLE AND PROPERTY No. 4:24-CV-00308-MKD INSRUANCE COMPANY, 8 ORDER DENYING STIPULATION Plaintiff, OF PARTIAL DISMISSAL OF D.R. 9 vs. ECF No. 25 10 JEREMY RICHARDSON, individually and 11 as Guardian of D.R., a minor; ANDY LOUIE and CHERYL LOUIE, a married 12 couple, each individually and their marital community comprised thereof,

13 Defendants.

14 Before the Court is parties’ Stipulation of Partial Dismissal of D.R. ECF 15 No. 25. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A), a plaintiff may dismiss an action 16 without court order by filing: (i) a notice of dismissal before the opposing party 17 serves either an answer or a motion for summary judgment; or (ii) a stipulation of 18 dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared. See also Van Leeuwen v. Bank 19 of Am., N.A., 304 F.R.D. 691, 697 (D. Utah 2015) ( “Rule 41(a) ‘allow[s] the 20 dismissal of all claims against one defendant, so that a defendant may be dismissed 1 from the entire action[.]’” (quoting Hells Canyon Pres. Council v. United States 2 Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 687 (9th Cir.2005)). Under LCivR 41(a)(1)(A), a

3 voluntary dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1) must also “contain a statement 4 that no answer or motion for summary judgment has been served.” 5 Plaintiff’s Voluntary Dismissal does not contain a statement regarding

6 whether an answer or motion for summary judgment has been served. See ECF 7 No. 25 at 1. An Answer was filed in this case on October 10, 2024, by Defendant 8 Richardson. Thus, Plaintiff cannot dismiss this action under Fed. R. Civ. P. 9 41(a)(1)(A)(i).

10 Further, the dismissal is not signed by all parties who have appeared. 11 Specifically, the dismissal has not been signed by Defendant Andy Louie who 12 appeared pro se at the scheduling conference on November 21, 2024.1 Therefore,

13 it does not meet the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). 14 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED: 15 1. Plaintiff’s Voluntary Dismissal, ECF No. 25, is DENIED with 16 to leave to refil e in compliance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) or (a)(2).

17 IT IS SO ORDERED. The District Court Executive is directed to file this 18 19 1 The other pro se Defendant in this case, Cheryl Louie, has not yet made an

20 appearance. 1 Order, provide copies to counsel. 2 DATED December 6, 2024.

3 s/Mary K. Dimke MARY K. DIMKE 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 5 6 7 8 9

10 11 12

13 14 15 16

17 18 19