Herrera v. County of Fresno

E.D. California

Herrera v. County of Fresno

DecidedJanuary 11, 2021

Docket1:18-cv-01297

StatusUnknown

This text of Herrera v. County of Fresno (Herrera v. County of Fresno) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Herrera v. County of Fresno, (E.D. Cal. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 CARLOS HERRERA, et al., CASE NO. 1:18-CV-1297 AWI EPG

9 Plaintiffs ORDER CLOSING CASE IN LIGHT OF STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL 10 v. WITHOUT PREJUDICE

11 COUNTY OF FRESNO, et al., (Doc. No. 59) 12 Defendants

13 14 15 On December 21, 2020, the parties filed a what is styled as a joint motion to dismiss. See 16 Doc. No. 59. Despite identifying the document on the docket as a motion and styling the 17 document as a motion, the document is in fact a stipulation to dismiss this case with prejudice. 18 See id. The stipulation is signed by all parties, so the Court interprets the stipulation to be one 19 under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1). 20 Rule 41(a)(1), in relevant part, reads:

21 (A) . . . the plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by filing: (i) a 22 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 23 have appeared. . . . (B) Unless the notice or stipulation states otherwise, the dismissal is without prejudice. 24 Dismissals under Rule 41(a)(1)(A), when properly filed, are effective immediately and do not 25 26 require a court order/court approval. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1); Yesh Music v. Lakewood 27 Church, 727 F.3d 356, 362 (5th Cir. 2013); Commercial Space Mgmt. Co. v. Boeing Co., 193 F.3d 28 I 1074, 1077 (9th Cir. 1999); Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997); In re 2, | Wolf, 842 F.2d 464, 466 (D.C. Cir. 1989). 3 Here, again all parties who have appeared in this case have signed the stipulated dismissal. 4 | See Doc. No. 9. Because all appearing parties have signed the stipulated dismissal with prejudice, 5 this case has terminated automatically. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A); Yesh Music, 727 F.3d at 362; Commercial Space, 193 F.3d at 1077. Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk is to CLOSE this case in light of the

9 parties’ filed and properly signed Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(a1) stipulation of dismissal with prejudice (Doc. 10 | No. 59). 11 12 IS SO ORDERED. 13 Dated: _ January 8, 2021 : : 14 _-SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

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

1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 CARLOS HERRERA, et al., CASE NO. 1:18-CV-1297 AWI EPG

9 Plaintiffs ORDER CLOSING CASE IN LIGHT OF STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL 10 v. WITHOUT PREJUDICE

11 COUNTY OF FRESNO, et al., (Doc. No. 59) 12 Defendants

13 14 15 On December 21, 2020, the parties filed a what is styled as a joint motion to dismiss. See 16 Doc. No. 59. Despite identifying the document on the docket as a motion and styling the 17 document as a motion, the document is in fact a stipulation to dismiss this case with prejudice. 18 See id. The stipulation is signed by all parties, so the Court interprets the stipulation to be one 19 under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1). 20 Rule 41(a)(1), in relevant part, reads:

21 (A) . . . the plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by filing: (i) a 22 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 23 have appeared. . . . (B) Unless the notice or stipulation states otherwise, the dismissal is without prejudice. 24 Dismissals under Rule 41(a)(1)(A), when properly filed, are effective immediately and do not 25 26 require a court order/court approval. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1); Yesh Music v. Lakewood 27 Church, 727 F.3d 356, 362 (5th Cir. 2013); Commercial Space Mgmt. Co. v. Boeing Co., 193 F.3d 28 I 1074, 1077 (9th Cir. 1999); Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997); In re 2, | Wolf, 842 F.2d 464, 466 (D.C. Cir. 1989). 3 Here, again all parties who have appeared in this case have signed the stipulated dismissal. 4 | See Doc. No. 9. Because all appearing parties have signed the stipulated dismissal with prejudice, 5 this case has terminated automatically. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A); Yesh Music, 727 F.3d at 362; Commercial Space, 193 F.3d at 1077. Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk is to CLOSE this case in light of the

9 parties’ filed and properly signed Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(a1) stipulation of dismissal with prejudice (Doc. 10 | No. 59). 11 12 IS SO ORDERED. 13 Dated: _ January 8, 2021 : : 14 _-SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Herrera v. County of Fresno, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/herrera-v-county-of-fresno-caed-2021.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack