BEERMAN v. SUPPORT DOGS, INC., 2:17-cv-326-FtM-99CM. (2017)
Court: District Court, M.D. Florida
Number: infdco20170719b30
Visitors: 4
Filed: Jul. 18, 2017
Latest Update: Jul. 18, 2017
Summary: ORDER 1 SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on review of Plaintiff Thomas Beerman's Notice of Withdrawal of Loss of Consortium Claim (Doc. 19) filed on July 18, 2017. Plaintiff Thomas Beerman seeks to dismiss Count II of the First Amended Complaint (Doc. 2). There is no indication whether Defendant objects. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A), a plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order "before the opposing party serves e
Summary: ORDER 1 SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on review of Plaintiff Thomas Beerman's Notice of Withdrawal of Loss of Consortium Claim (Doc. 19) filed on July 18, 2017. Plaintiff Thomas Beerman seeks to dismiss Count II of the First Amended Complaint (Doc. 2). There is no indication whether Defendant objects. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A), a plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order "before the opposing party serves ei..
More
ORDER1
SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL, District Judge.
This matter comes before the Court on review of Plaintiff Thomas Beerman's Notice of Withdrawal of Loss of Consortium Claim (Doc. 19) filed on July 18, 2017. Plaintiff Thomas Beerman seeks to dismiss Count II of the First Amended Complaint (Doc. 2). There is no indication whether Defendant objects.
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A), a plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order "before the opposing party serves either an answer or a motion for summary judgment" or by "a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared." In the Eleventh Circuit, "precedent dictates that Rule 41 allows a plaintiff to dismiss all of his claims against a particular defendant; its text does not permit plaintiffs to pick and choose, dismissing only particular claims within an action." Campbell v. Altec Indus., Inc., 605 F.3d 839, 841 n.1 (11th Cir. 2010). As plaintiff is only seeking to dismiss Count II, the voluntary dismissal will be denied. The Notice will not be construed as a motion to amend. If Plaintiffs wish to amend and exclude Count II they should file a motion to amend in compliance with the Local Rules.
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED:
Plaintiff Thomas Beerman's Notice of Withdrawal of Loss of Consortium Claim (Doc. 19) is DENIED without prejudice to filing a motion for leave to amend.
DONE and ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. Disclaimer: Documents filed in CM/ECF may contain hyperlinks to other documents or websites. These hyperlinks are provided only for users' convenience. Users are cautioned that hyperlinked documents in CM/ECF are subject to PACER fees. By allowing hyperlinks to other websites, this Court does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their websites. Likewise, the Court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their websites. The Court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the Court.
Source: Leagle
