Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Edwards v. Bratton, 1:13-cv-00345-EPG-PC. (2016)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20160429964 Visitors: 12
Filed: Apr. 28, 2016
Latest Update: Apr. 28, 2016
Summary: ORDER GIVING FULL EFFECT TO STIPULATION TO DISMISS CASE, WITH PREJUDICE, UNDER RULE 41 (ECF No. 131.) ORDER FOR CLERK TO CLOSE CASE ERICA P. GROSJEAN , Magistrate Judge . Steven R. Edwards is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. The case proceeds with Plaintiff's original Complaint filed on March 11, 2013, against defendants R. Bratton (LVN) and D. Cabral (Psychiatric Technician) (collectively, "Defendants"), for inadequate
More

ORDER GIVING FULL EFFECT TO STIPULATION TO DISMISS CASE, WITH PREJUDICE, UNDER RULE 41 (ECF No. 131.)

ORDER FOR CLERK TO CLOSE CASE

Steven R. Edwards is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The case proceeds with Plaintiff's original Complaint filed on March 11, 2013, against defendants R. Bratton (LVN) and D. Cabral (Psychiatric Technician) (collectively, "Defendants"), for inadequate medical care, in violation of the Eighth Amendment. (ECF No. 1.)1

The parties to this action have consented to the jurisdiction of a Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). (ECF Nos. 77, 83.) Therefore, Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean shall conduct any and all proceedings in the case, including trial and entry of final judgment.

On April 26, 2016, a stipulation for voluntary dismissal with prejudice was filed with the Court, containing the signatures of Plaintiff and Counsel for Defendants Cabral, Bratton, Escoto, and Pascual. (ECF No. 131.) The stipulation states that Plaintiff Steven R. Edwards and Defendants Cabral, Bratton, Escoto, and Pascual have resolved this case in its entirety and therefore stipulate to a dismissal of this action with prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii).

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) allows plaintiffs to "dismiss an action without a court order by filing a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared." The stipulation filed on April 26, 2016 is signed by all parties who have appeared in this case. Therefore, the parties' stipulation is given full force and effect, and this case is dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk shall close the case.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The parties' stipulation for voluntary dismissal of this action with prejudice is effective as of the date it was filed; 2. This case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; and 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

FootNotes


1. On June 12, 2013 and June 13, 2013, Plaintiff filed notices to proceed only against defendants Bratton, Cabral, Escorto, and Pascual, for deliberate indifference to his medical needs. (ECF Nos. 9, 10.) By this order, all other claims and defendants are hereby dismissed from this action. Thus, Plaintiff's excessive force claim is dismissed from this action based on Plaintiff's failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted under § 1983, and defendants George, Simas, and Joslin are dismissed from this action based on Plaintiff's failure to state any claims against them. On July 17, 2015, summary judgment was granted to defendants Escorto and Pascual. (ECF No. 73.) Therefore, this case now proceeds only against defendants Bratton and Cabral for deliberate indifference to Plaintiff's medical needs.
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer