The Revocable Living Trust of Judith A. Dunn Dated December 16, 1996, Judith A. Dunn, Trustee v. Quicken Loans, Inc.

• Court: District Court, W.D. Texas
• Decided: September 21, 2020
• Docket: 1:18-cv-00371
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

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

THE REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST OF § JUDITH A. DUNN DATED DECEMBER § 16, 1996 JUDITH A. DUNN, TRUSTEE, § § Plaintiff, § § v. § 1:18-CV-371-RP § QUICKEN LOANS, INC., et al., § § Defendants. §

ORDER

On September 18, 2020, Plaintiff The Revocable Living Trust of Judith A. Dunn (“Plaintiff”) filed an agreed motion to dismiss stating that the parties have resolved their dispute. (Dkt. 62; see also Order, Dkt. 61 (ordering that, in light of the parties’ settlement, the parties shall file dismissal papers, or a joint status report, by September 18, 2020)). The Court construes the motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2). 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). In light of the parties’ settlement and agreement to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims against Edwin Smith and Ranene Smith without prejudice, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion to dismiss, (Dkt. 62), is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs claims against Edwin Smith and Ranene Smith ace DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The Court will enter final judgment regarding all the claims in this case by separate order. SIGNED on September 21, 2020.

ROBERT PITMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE