From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Daniels v. Dep't of Corrs.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Sep 6, 2011
No. 2:10-cv-02332 KJM KJN PS (E.D. Cal. Sep. 6, 2011)

Opinion

No. 2:10-cv-02332 KJM KJN PS

09-06-2011

LAURA B. DANIELS, Plaintiff, v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, and Does 1-50, inclusive, Defendants.


No. 2:10-cv-02332 KJM KJN PS

On August 31, 2011, United States District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller was assigned as the district judge in this action. (Order of Reassignment, Dkt. No. 21.)

ORDER

On June 1, 2011, the parties filed a stipulation dismissing this case without prejudice, which was necessarily filed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). (Dkt. No. 19.) By rule, that stipulated dismissal, which was signed by all of the parties to the action, was effective immediately and without a court order. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1) (providing that "a stipulation of dismissal signed by all of the parties who have appeared" effectuates a dismissal without a court order); see also Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1473 & n.4 (9th Cir. 1986) (noting that the parties' oral representations agreeing to the dismissal of the action constituted a voluntary stipulated dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), and that no court order was necessary to effectuate the dismissal); cf. United States v. Real Property Located at 475 Martin Lane, Beverly Hills, CA, 545 F.3d 1134, 1145-46 (9th Cir. 2008) (addressing the self-executing nature of dismissals under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i)).

This action proceeds before the undersigned pursuant to Eastern District of California Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
--------

Nevertheless, on September 1, 2011, defendant filed a proposed order dismissing the action pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), seeking an effective date of dismissal of June 1, 2011. (Dkt. No. 22.) Defendant's proposed order is unnecessary to effectuate the dismissal of plaintiff's case without prejudice because the case was already dismissed on June 1, 2011. In any event, the undersigned enters this order for the purpose of clarification and to close this case.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The stipulated dismissal filed by the parties on June 1, 2011, effectuated the immediate dismissal of this case without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) on June 1, 2011, and without a court.

2. The Clerk of Court is directed to vacate all dates and close this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

KENDALL J. NEWMAN

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Daniels v. Dep't of Corrs.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Sep 6, 2011
No. 2:10-cv-02332 KJM KJN PS (E.D. Cal. Sep. 6, 2011)
Case details for

Daniels v. Dep't of Corrs.

Case Details

Full title:LAURA B. DANIELS, Plaintiff, v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Sep 6, 2011

Citations

No. 2:10-cv-02332 KJM KJN PS (E.D. Cal. Sep. 6, 2011)