Brantley v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc.

E.D. Tennessee

Brantley v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc.

DecidedSeptember 16, 2022

Docket3:22-cv-00168

StatusUnknown

This text of Brantley v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc. (Brantley v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Tennessee primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Brantley v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc., (E.D. Tenn. 2022).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE

MICHAEL DARNEL BRANTLEY, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No.: 3:22-CV-168-KAC-JEM ) EQUIFAX INFORMATION ) SERVICES, LLC, ) ) Defendant. )

ORDER CLOSING CASE

Before the Court is the Parties’ “Joint Motion to Dismiss Defendant Equifax Information Services, LLC with Prejudice” [Doc. 27]. On September 14, 2022, the Parties filed a joint motion signed by all Parties remaining in this case to “dismiss[] [] all claims against” Defendant Equifax “with prejudice” “pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure, 41” “[i]n light of the settlement” between them [Id. at 1]. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide two distinct procedures for dismissal that are relevant here. First, under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), “the plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by filing . . . a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared.” “Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) orders, generally speaking are ‘self-executing’ and do ‘not require judicial approval.’” Exact Software N. Am., Inc. v. DeMoisey, 718 F.3d 535, 540 (6th Cir. 2013) (quoting Green v. Nevers, 111 F.3d 1295, 1301 (6th Cir. 1997)). Second, under Rule 41(a)(2), “[e]xcept as provided in Rule 41(a)(1), an action may be dismissed at the plaintiff’s request only by court order, on terms that the court considers proper.” Here, the Parties have satisfied the requirements for dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) [See Doc. 27]. As such, the Parties’ stipulation of dismissal with prejudice was effective on September 14, 2022 when filed, and no order from this Court is required. See Exact Software N. Am., Inc., 718 F.3d at 540; see also Dillon-Barber v. Regents of the Univ. of Mich., 51 F. App’x 946, 951 (6th Cir. 2002). Because there are no issues remaining in this case, the Court DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to close the case.

IT IS SO ORDERED. s/ Katherine A. Crytzer KATHERINE A. CRYTZER United States District Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE

MICHAEL DARNEL BRANTLEY, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No.: 3:22-CV-168-KAC-JEM ) EQUIFAX INFORMATION ) SERVICES, LLC, ) ) Defendant. )

ORDER CLOSING CASE

Before the Court is the Parties’ “Joint Motion to Dismiss Defendant Equifax Information Services, LLC with Prejudice” [Doc. 27]. On September 14, 2022, the Parties filed a joint motion signed by all Parties remaining in this case to “dismiss[] [] all claims against” Defendant Equifax “with prejudice” “pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure, 41” “[i]n light of the settlement” between them [Id. at 1]. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide two distinct procedures for dismissal that are relevant here. First, under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), “the plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by filing . . . a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared.” “Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) orders, generally speaking are ‘self-executing’ and do ‘not require judicial approval.’” Exact Software N. Am., Inc. v. DeMoisey, 718 F.3d 535, 540 (6th Cir. 2013) (quoting Green v. Nevers, 111 F.3d 1295, 1301 (6th Cir. 1997)). Second, under Rule 41(a)(2), “[e]xcept as provided in Rule 41(a)(1), an action may be dismissed at the plaintiff’s request only by court order, on terms that the court considers proper.” Here, the Parties have satisfied the requirements for dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) [See Doc. 27]. As such, the Parties’ stipulation of dismissal with prejudice was effective on September 14, 2022 when filed, and no order from this Court is required. See Exact Software N. Am., Inc., 718 F.3d at 540; see also Dillon-Barber v. Regents of the Univ. of Mich., 51 F. App’x 946, 951 (6th Cir. 2002). Because there are no issues remaining in this case, the Court DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to close the case.

IT IS SO ORDERED. s/ Katherine A. Crytzer KATHERINE A. CRYTZER United States District Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Brantley v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brantley-v-experian-information-solutions-inc-tned-2022.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack