Hudson Specialty Insurance Company v. Hofer

Opinion

HUDSON SPECIALTY INSURANCE Case No. 20-CV-0852-BAS-RBB COMPANY, ORDER GRANTING JOINT Plaintiff, v. (ECF No. 60) SCOTT HOFER, et al., Defendants.

Before the Court is the parties’ joint motion to dismiss with prejudice this action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“Rule”) 41(a)(2). (Joint Mot., ECF No. 60.) “Except 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.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2). “The Ninth Circuit has long held that the decision to grant a voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a)(2) is addressed to the sound discretion of the [d]istrict [c]ourt[.]” Hamilton v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co., 679 F.2d 143, 145 (9th Cir. 1982) (citing, inter alia, Sams v. Beech Aircraft Corp., 625 F.2d 273, 277 (9th Cir. 1980)); Blue Mountain Constr. Corp. v. Werner, 270 F.2d 305, 306 (9th Cir. 1959), cert. denied, 361 U.S. 931 (1960). “A district court should grant a motion for dismissal under Rule 41(a)(2) unless a defendant can show it will suffer some plain legal prejudice as a result.” Smith v. Lenches, 263 F.3d 972, 975 (2001) (footnote omitted). “Legal prejudice” is “prejudice to some legal interest, some legal claim, [or] some legal argument.” Westlands Water Dist. v. United States, 100 F.3d 94, 97 (9th Cir. 1996). A defendant is not said to suffer “legal preyudice” from: (1) “[uJ]ncertainty because a dispute remains unresolved” or the “threat of future litigation”; (2) the inconvenience of having to defend itself in a different forum; or (3) a plaintiff gaining a tactical advantage through dismissal. Smith, 263 F.3d at 976 (citing Hamilton, 679 F.2d at 145). Because Defendants do not identify, nor does the Court find apparent, any legal prejudice that might result from dismissal of this action with prejudice, the Court GRANTS the Motion and DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE Love’s claims. (ECF 60.) Costs and fees are to be handled in accordance with the settlement agreement executed by the parties. Ud. ¥ 3.) IT IS SO ORDERED. / , DATED: March 3, 2022 Lin A (Lyohaa 6 United States District Judge