Opinion
Case No. 12-cv-1430
02-08-2013
KEVIN SIMPSON, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF BLOOMINGTON, et al., Defendants.
ORDER & OPINION
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's "Motion for Clarification/Reconsideration." (Doc. 48). For the reasons stated below, the Motion is granted.
On January 23, 2013, the Court received Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 46), which explained that Plaintiff has decided to dismiss this suit. The Court construed this as a request for voluntary dismissal pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A), because none of the Defendants have filed answers or motions for summary judgment. Ordinarily, such a dismissal is without prejudice, but because Plaintiff requested the "release of all Defendants named within from liability concerns," the Court understood him to be requesting a with-prejudice dismissal. (Doc. 46 at 2). Plaintiff has now filed the instant Motion, explaining that he prefers the dismissal to be without prejudice. Rule 41(a)(1)(A) permits a plaintiff to specify the type of dismissal he prefers; the default is without prejudice.
Plaintiff's motivation for this request appears to be informed by an erroneous understanding of the meaning of a dismissal "with" or "without" prejudice. He seems to believe that a "with prejudice" dismissal would permit Defendants to retaliate against him with impunity. (Doc. 48 at 1). On the contrary, new instances of unlawful retaliation would form their own claim, which would not be barred by the with-prejudice dismissal of the claims contained in this suit. However, since it is Plaintiff's choice under Rule 41(a)(1)(A), the Court permits the "without prejudice" dismissal.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff's "Motion for Clarification/Reconsideration" (Doc. 48) is GRANTED, the Order of January 24, 2013 (Doc. 47) is VACATED, Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 46) is GRANTED, and this matter is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. CASE TERMINATED.
_________________________
JOE BILLY McDADE
United States Senior District Judge