Whittle v. Unum Life Insurance Company of America

Opinion

DAWN WHITTLE, Case No. 21-cv-0386-BAS-WVG

Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING JOINT v. MOTION TO DISMISS (ECF No. 19)

OF AMERICA, Defendant.

Before the Court is the parties’ joint motion to dismiss this action with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“Rule”) 41(a)(2). (Mot., ECF No. 19.) Plaintiff Dawn Whittle brought this action against Defendant Unum Life Insurance Company of America on March 4, 2021 seeking disability benefits under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001, et. seq. (Compl., ECF No. 1.) Defendant answered the Complaint on April 30, 2021, denying the legal claims against it. (ECF No. 6.) On December 8, 2021, the parties jointly moved to dismiss this action in its entirety with prejudice. (Mot. 1.) “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 funder Rule 41(a)(2) is addressed to the sound discretion of the [d]istrict [c]Jourt[.]” Hamilton v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co., 679 F.2d 143, 145 (9th Cir. 1982) (citing, inter 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) “[u]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 Defendant does 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 to dismiss the action with prejudice. (ECF No. 19.) The clerk of court shall close this case. / yy DATED: December 8, 2021 ( yi uA (Liphan 6 United States District Judge