Jane Doe (H.E.W.) v. Radisson Hospitality, Inc., et al.

• Court: District Court, W.D. Texas
• Decided: February 26, 2026
• Docket: 1:23-cv-01456
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

JANE DOE (H.E.W.), § § Plaintiff, § § v. § 1:23-CV-1456-RP § § RADISSON HOSPITALITY, INC., et al., § § Defendants. §

ORDER

On February 10, 2026, Plaintiff Jane Doe (H.E.W.) (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant AMIN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION D/B/A AMERICA’S BEST VALUE INN (“Amin Development”) filed a joint motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims against Amin Development with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2). (Joint Mot., Dkt. 178). Rule 41(a)(2) provides that, when the provisions of 41(a)(1) do not apply, the plaintiff may have a case dismissed “only by court order.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2). Here, because the stipulation is not “signed by all parties who have appeared,” Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) does not apply. Rule 41(a)(2) “allows plaintiffs to freely dismiss their suits, subject to court approval, provided the dismissal does not prejudice any party.” Templeton v. Nedllovd Lines, 901 F.2d 1273, 1274 (5th Cir. 1990). The district court has discretion to grant a Rule 41(a)(2) motion to dismiss. Manshack v. Sw. Elec. Power Co., 915 F.2d 172, 174 (5th Cir. 1990). Generally, motions for voluntary dismissal should be freely granted, unless the non-moving party can show it would suffer some plain legal prejudice. Elbaor v. Tripath Imaging, Inc., 279 F.3d 314, 317 (5th Cir. 2002). Given that this a joint motion with Defendant Amin Development, that no other party has filed an opposition to this motion,’ and that counsel for Defendant A&D Hotel, LLC (“A&D”’) informed the Court during a hearing before United States Magistrate Judge Mark Lane on February 18, 2026, that all Defendants except for Defendant A&D are settling, the Court in its discretion will grant the motion. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff and Defendant AMIN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION D/B/A AMERICA’S BEST VALUE INN’s Joint Motion to Dismiss with Prejudice, (Dkt. 178), is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs claims against Defendant AMIN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION D/B/A AMERICA’S BEST VALUE INN are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff and Defendant AMIN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION D/B/A AMERICA’S BEST VALUE INN shall bear their own respective costs and attorney’s fees. IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that Defendant AMIN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION D/B/A AMERICA’S BEST VALUE INN shall be terminated as a party in this case. SIGNED on February 26, 2026.

ROBERT PITMAN ——— UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

1 See W.D. Tex. Loc. R. CV-7(d) (permitting the Court to grant a motion as unopposed if no response is filed by the response deadline).