Wray v. Greenburg
Opinion
1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
9 Amanda Wray, et al., No. CV-22-00859-PHX-DWL
10 Plaintiffs, ORDER
11 v.
12 Jann-Michael Greenburg, et al.,
13 Defendants. 14 15 The parties have filed a stipulation for partial dismissal (Doc. 94) pursuant to Rule 16 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), which permits dismissal of “an action.” But dismissal of this action is not 17 sought. The stipulation, if granted, would not eliminate any defendant from this action— 18 indeed, it would not even eliminate any claim—and would merely resolve certain 19 defendants’ liability as to only one of the plaintiffs. Rule 41 is inappropriate in this 20 circumstance. Instead, the parties can accomplish what they seek by agreeing to the filing 21 of a second amended complaint that clarifies which claims by which plaintiff(s) against 22 which defendant(s) remain at issue. Hells Canyon Preservation Council v. U.S. Forest 23 Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 687 (9th Cir. 2005) (“As its title, ‘Dismissal of Actions,’ suggests, 24 Rule 41, or at least Rule 41(a), governs dismissals of entire actions, not of individual 25 claims. Most contemporary courts, including our own, have declined to read the rule 26 literally as permitting the dismissal only of an entire action against all defendants. These 27 same cases, however, have only extended the rule to allow the dismissal of all claims 28 against one defendant, so that a defendant may be dismissed from the entire action. Nothing in the case law suggests that Rule 41(a) extends to the voluntary withdrawal of individual claims against a defendant remaining in the case. ... Instead, || withdrawals of individual claims against a given defendant are governed by [Rule] 15, 4|| which addresses amendments to pleadings. . . .””). 5 Accordingly, 6 IT IS ORDERED that the parties’ stipulation to dismiss certain claims (Doc. 94) is 7\| denied. Pursuant to LRCiv 15.1, Plaintiffs can amend without seeking the Court’s leave 8 || with the opposing parties’ written consent. 9 Dated this 7th day of September, 2023. 10 11 12 Lom ee” 13 f t _o—— Dominic W. Lanza 14 United States District Judge 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
_2-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Wray v. Greenburg (Wray v. Greenburg) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.