Ayers v. Fellowship of Christian Athletes, 1:18-cv-01026-AWI-SAB. (2019)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20190506845
Visitors: 3
Filed: May 01, 2019
Latest Update: May 01, 2019
Summary: ORDER REJECTING STIPULATION TO DISMISS CERTAIN DEFENDANTS (ECF No. 51) STANLEY A. BOONE , Magistrate Judge . On April 4, 2019, the Court issued an order granting various Defendants' motions to dismiss in part, and specifically dismissing all claims against Defendant Reedley Mennonite Brethren Church, and Defendant Joel Kersey without prejudice. (ECF No. 48) The Court ordered Plaintiff to file a second amended complaint within twenty-one days of the order. (ECF No. 48.) On May 1, 2019, Plai
Summary: ORDER REJECTING STIPULATION TO DISMISS CERTAIN DEFENDANTS (ECF No. 51) STANLEY A. BOONE , Magistrate Judge . On April 4, 2019, the Court issued an order granting various Defendants' motions to dismiss in part, and specifically dismissing all claims against Defendant Reedley Mennonite Brethren Church, and Defendant Joel Kersey without prejudice. (ECF No. 48) The Court ordered Plaintiff to file a second amended complaint within twenty-one days of the order. (ECF No. 48.) On May 1, 2019, Plain..
More
ORDER REJECTING STIPULATION TO DISMISS CERTAIN DEFENDANTS
(ECF No. 51)
STANLEY A. BOONE, Magistrate Judge.
On April 4, 2019, the Court issued an order granting various Defendants' motions to dismiss in part, and specifically dismissing all claims against Defendant Reedley Mennonite Brethren Church, and Defendant Joel Kersey without prejudice. (ECF No. 48) The Court ordered Plaintiff to file a second amended complaint within twenty-one days of the order. (ECF No. 48.) On May 1, 2019, Plaintiff, Defendant Reedley Mennonite Brethren Church, and Defendant Joel Kersey, filed a stipulation to dismiss all claims against these two Defendants pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1). (ECF No. 51.) Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) requires that "a stipulation of dismissal [be] signed by all parties who have appeared." The stipulation submitted here was not signed by all parties and therefore such claims cannot be properly dismissed under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii).
The Court rejects the stipulation as submitted because Plaintiff may not dismiss by stipulation these two Defendants without all parties in the case signing such stipulation. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that if Plaintiff wishes to dismiss these two Defendants, Plaintiff must either file a stipulation signed by all parties pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), or file a request for dismissal pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
