Barney v. Peters. M.D.

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA SAVANNAH DIVISION

FRANK M. BARNEY, individually ) and as Administrator of the ) Estate of SONCERA ) KIMBERLY BARNEY, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) CV420-173 ) GREGORY T. PETERS. M.D., and ) REAL RADIOLOGY, LLC, ) ) Defendants. )

ORDER The Court directed Plaintiff to show cause why the unnamed defendants “John Does 1-5” and “John Does, Inc.’s 1-5” should not be dismissed from this case. Doc. 138. The parties subsequently filed a Joint Stipulation of Dismissal of Defendants John Doe’s 1-5 and John Doe, Inc.’s 1-5. Doc. 139. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), a plaintiff may dismiss an action by filing “a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared.” “Rule 41(a)(1) is [also] a proper mechanism to dismiss less than all the parties to a controversy.” Jackson v. Equifax Info. Servs., LLC, 2020 WL 476698, at *1 (S.D. Ga. Jan. 29, 2020). Because the joint stipulation is signed by all the parties who have appeared, the parties’ request is GRANTED. Doc. 139. A dismissal is without prejudice unless a notice or stipulation states otherwise. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(B). Here, since the parties do not indicate whether they stipulate to a dismissal with or without prejudice,

see generally doc. 139, Defendants John Doe’s 1-5 and John Doe, Inc.’s 1- 5 are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The Clerk is DIRECTED to amend the case caption to remove John Doe’s 1-5 and John Doe, Inc.’s 1-5 as defendants in this case. SO ORDERED, this 27th day of March, 2023.

( Lnigho~d (ex CHRISTOPHER L. RAY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA