Neal v. Walker

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS TEXARKANA DIVISION

MICAH NEAL PLAINTIFF

v. Case No. 4:21-cv-4068

JEFFIE WALKER; GOLDEN ADAMS, et al. DEFENDANTS

ORDER Before the Court is the parties’ Joint Stipulation of Dismissal. ECF No. 80. No response is necessary, and the matter is ripe for consideration. The parties inform the Court that they have reached a settlement agreement and “agree that this matter should be dismissed with prejudice.” ECF No. 80. An action may be dismissed by “a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). The “entry of such a stipulation of dismissal is effective automatically and does not require judicial approval.” Gardiner v. A.H. Robins Co., 747 F.2d 1180, 1189 (8th Cir. 1984). Thus, Plaintiff’s claims were effectively dismissed when the stipulation was filed. However, the instant Order issues for purposes of maintaining the docket. Therefore, to the extent that the instant stipulation (ECF No. 80) constitutes a motion, it is hereby GRANTED. Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Further, if any party desires that the terms of settlement be a part of the record therein, those terms should be reduced to writing and filed with the Court within thirty (30) days of the entry of this judgment. The Court retains jurisdiction to vacate this order upon cause shown that the settlement has not been completed and further litigation is necessary. IT IS SO ORDERED, this 20th day of June, 2023. /s/ Susan O. Hickey Susan O. Hickey Chief United States District Judge