People v. Mack

Full title: PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, Plaintiff, v. ANTHONY MACK, Defendant

Court: United States District Court, D. Colorado

Date published: Jun 19, 2007

Civil Action No. 07-cv-01017-BNB (D. Colo. Jun. 19, 2007)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 07-cv-01017-BNB.

June 19, 2007

ORDER DISMISSING CASE

ZITA WEINSHIENK, Senior District Judge

Defendant Anthony Mack is a prisoner in the custody of the Colorado Department of Corrections at the Sterling Correctional Facility at Sterling, Colorado. Mr. Mack initiated this action by filing pro se a "Motion for Subpoena of Documentary Evidence" in which he apparently asserted a claim pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act. In an order filed on May 15, 2007, Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland entered an order directing the clerk of the Court to commence a civil action and directing Mr. Mack to cure certain deficiencies if he wished to pursue his claim. On June 12, 2007, Mr. Mack submitted a letter to the Court stating that he would like to withdraw this civil action because he has obtained the information he sought.

The Court must construe the June 12 letter liberally because Mr. Mack is representing himself. See Haines v. Kerner , 404 U.S. 519, 520-21 (1972); Hall v. Bellmon , 935 F.2d 1106, 1110 (10^th Cir. 1991). The Court will construe the letter as a notice of voluntary dismissal pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Rule 41(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that "an action may be dismissed by the plaintiff without order of court (i) by filing a notice of dismissal at any time before service by the adverse party of an answer or of a motion for summary judgment." Although Mr. Mack did not name himself as the Plaintiff in the caption of his motion, he is the party that initiated this action. No response has been filed by any other party in this action. A voluntary dismissal pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1) is effective immediately upon the filing of a written notice of dismissal, and no subsequent court order is necessary. See J. Moore, Moore's Federal Practice ¶ 41.02(2) (2d ed. 1995); Hyde Constr. Co. v. Koehring Co. , 388 F.2d 501, 507 (10^th Cir. 1968). The notice closes the file. See Hyde Constr. Co. , 388 F.2d at 507. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that the letter to the Court filed on June 12, 2007, is construed as a notice of voluntary dismissal without prejudice pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(a)(1). It is

FURTHER ORDERED that the voluntary dismissal is effective as of June 12, 2007, the date the notice was filed in this action. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that judgment is entered in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant.