Minor v. Life Insurance Company of North America

W.D. Arkansas

Minor v. Life Insurance Company of North America

DecidedAugust 25, 2020

Docket1:20-cv-01036

StatusUnknown

This text of Minor v. Life Insurance Company of North America (Minor v. Life Insurance Company of North America) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Minor v. Life Insurance Company of North America, (W.D. Ark. 2020).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS EL DORADO DIVISION

REBECCA MINOR PLAINTIFF

v. Case No. 1:20-cv-1036

LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA and LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION DEFENDANTS ORDER Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Stipulation of Dismissal of Lockheed Martin Corporation. (ECF No. 8). On August 13, 2020, Plaintiff filed the instant Stipulation of Dismissal, stating that she wishes to dismiss her claims against Defendant Lockheed Martin Corporation without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i). Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) provides that an action may be dismissed by filing “a notice of dismissal before the opposing party serves either an answer or a motion for summary judgment.”1 No answer or motion for summary judgment has been filed in this matter. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant Lockheed Martin Corporation are hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.2 IT IS SO ORDERED, this 25th day of August, 2020. /s/ Susan O. Hickey Susan O. Hickey Chief United States District Judge

1 There is much debate as to whether Rule 41 allows a plaintiff to dismiss particular claims or parties or if it may only be used to dismiss an action in its entirety. 9 Fed. Prac. & Proc. Civ. § 2362 (3d ed.). Nonetheless, the Court certainly has the power to dismiss a party or claim on motion by the plaintiff. See Johnston v. Cartwright, 355 F.2d 32, 39 (8th Cir. 1966) (holding that it is not material when dismissing party on plaintiff’s motion if courts act under Rule 15(a) which relates to pleading amendments, Rule 21 which concerns misjoinder, or Rule 41 which concerns dismissal of actions); 9 Fed. Prac. & Proc. Civ. § 2362 (3d ed.). Thus, the Court will consider Plaintiff’s Stipulation of Dismissal of Lockheed Martin Corporation pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i). 2 Defendant Lockheed Martin Corporation’s Motion for Extension of Time to File Answer (ECF No. 19) should be and hereby is DENIED AS MOOT.

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS EL DORADO DIVISION

REBECCA MINOR PLAINTIFF

v. Case No. 1:20-cv-1036

LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA and LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION DEFENDANTS ORDER Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Stipulation of Dismissal of Lockheed Martin Corporation. (ECF No. 8). On August 13, 2020, Plaintiff filed the instant Stipulation of Dismissal, stating that she wishes to dismiss her claims against Defendant Lockheed Martin Corporation without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i). Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) provides that an action may be dismissed by filing “a notice of dismissal before the opposing party serves either an answer or a motion for summary judgment.”1 No answer or motion for summary judgment has been filed in this matter. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant Lockheed Martin Corporation are hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.2 IT IS SO ORDERED, this 25th day of August, 2020. /s/ Susan O. Hickey Susan O. Hickey Chief United States District Judge

1 There is much debate as to whether Rule 41 allows a plaintiff to dismiss particular claims or parties or if it may only be used to dismiss an action in its entirety. 9 Fed. Prac. & Proc. Civ. § 2362 (3d ed.). Nonetheless, the Court certainly has the power to dismiss a party or claim on motion by the plaintiff. See Johnston v. Cartwright, 355 F.2d 32, 39 (8th Cir. 1966) (holding that it is not material when dismissing party on plaintiff’s motion if courts act under Rule 15(a) which relates to pleading amendments, Rule 21 which concerns misjoinder, or Rule 41 which concerns dismissal of actions); 9 Fed. Prac. & Proc. Civ. § 2362 (3d ed.). Thus, the Court will consider Plaintiff’s Stipulation of Dismissal of Lockheed Martin Corporation pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i). 2 Defendant Lockheed Martin Corporation’s Motion for Extension of Time to File Answer (ECF No. 19) should be and hereby is DENIED AS MOOT.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Minor v. Life Insurance Company of North America, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/minor-v-life-insurance-company-of-north-america-arwd-2020.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack