From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Muro v. Interlock Sec. Grp.

United States District Court, Middle District of Florida
Jul 1, 2024
2:23-cv-616-NPM (M.D. Fla. Jul. 1, 2024)

Opinion

2:23-cv-616-NPM

07-01-2024

Stephanie Muro, Plaintiff, v. Interlock Security Group, Inc., Defendant.


ORDER

NICHOLAS P. MIZELL, United States Magistrate Judge

In this Fair Labor Standards Act case, the parties have filed a construed joint stipulation of dismissal with prejudice. (Doc. 28). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) allows a plaintiff to dismiss an action voluntarily if a stipulation of dismissal is signed by all parties who have appeared. The dismissal is effective on filing and requires no further action by the court. See Anago Franchising, Inc. v. Shaz, LLC, 677 F.3d 1272, 1278 (11th Cir. 2012).

The text of the FLSA does not provide, and no Eleventh Circuit decision has ever held, that FLSA claims are exempt from Rule 41. To the contrary, the Eleventh Circuit has reasoned that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure apply “in actions brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act no less than in any other case.” Vasconcelo v. Miami Auto Max, Inc., 981 F.3d 934, 942 (11th Cir. 2020); see also Casso-Lopez v. Beach Time Rental Suncoast, LLC, 335 F.R.D. 458, 461-62 (M.D. Fla. 2020) (holding parties may terminate an FLSA case by filing either a Rule 41 stipulation of dismissal with prejudice or a Rule 68(a) notice of acceptance of an offer of judgment “and the district court is immediately powerless to interfere”); Dicomo v. KJIMS Dev. Co., Inc., No. 2:16-cv-327-FtM-99CM, 2016 WL 6678420, *1 (M.D. Fla. Nov. 14, 2016) (“[T]he parties may dismiss [an FLSA] case in its entirety pursuant to the Joint Stipulation for Dismissal With Prejudice without further action from the Court as it is unconditional and self-executing.”).

Accordingly, this action is dismissed with prejudice with each party to bear its own attorney's fees and costs. The clerk is directed to enter judgment, deny all pending motions, terminate all scheduled events, and close the case.

ORDERED.


Summaries of

Muro v. Interlock Sec. Grp.

United States District Court, Middle District of Florida
Jul 1, 2024
2:23-cv-616-NPM (M.D. Fla. Jul. 1, 2024)
Case details for

Muro v. Interlock Sec. Grp.

Case Details

Full title:Stephanie Muro, Plaintiff, v. Interlock Security Group, Inc., Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Middle District of Florida

Date published: Jul 1, 2024

Citations

2:23-cv-616-NPM (M.D. Fla. Jul. 1, 2024)