Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 446 views

    07-08-10 - Notice of Voluntary Dismissal

    Uploaded by

    Orlando Tea Party
    Plaintiffs Don Forward and the Titusville Patriots filed a notice of voluntary dismissal without prejudice of all claims asserted by them in the case. They argued that dismissal was appropriate under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure since no defendant had filed an answer or motion for summary judgment. Alternatively, they requested dismissal without prejudice under Rule 42(a)(2), which allows such dismissal by court order if it does not prejudice the defendant. Granting dismissal would not prejudice the defendants. Therefore, the plaintiffs' claims were dismissed without prejudice.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    07-08-10 - Notice of Voluntary Dismissal

    Uploaded by

    Orlando Tea Party
    446 views5 pages
    Plaintiffs Don Forward and the Titusville Patriots filed a notice of voluntary dismissal without prejudice of all claims asserted by them in the case. They argued that dismissal was appropriate under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure since no defendant had filed an answer or motion for summary judgment. Alternatively, they requested dismissal without prejudice under Rule 42(a)(2), which allows such dismissal by court order if it does not prejudice the defendant. Granting dismissal would not prejudice the defendants. Therefore, the plaintiffs' claims were dismissed without prejudice.

    Original Description:

    07-08-10_Notice of Voluntary Dismissal

    Original Title

    07-08-10_Notice of Voluntary Dismissal

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Plaintiffs Don Forward and the Titusville Patriots filed a notice of voluntary dismissal without prejudice of all claims asserted by them in the case. They argued that dismissal was appropriate under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure since no defendant had filed an answer or motion for summary judgment. Alternatively, they requested dismissal without prejudice under Rule 42(a)(2), which allows such dismissal by court order if it does not prejudice the defendant. Granting dismissal would not prejudice the defendants. Therefore, the plaintiffs' claims were dismissed without prejudice.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    446 views5 pages

    07-08-10 - Notice of Voluntary Dismissal

    Uploaded by

    Orlando Tea Party
    Plaintiffs Don Forward and the Titusville Patriots filed a notice of voluntary dismissal without prejudice of all claims asserted by them in the case. They argued that dismissal was appropriate under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure since no defendant had filed an answer or motion for summary judgment. Alternatively, they requested dismissal without prejudice under Rule 42(a)(2), which allows such dismissal by court order if it does not prejudice the defendant. Granting dismissal would not prejudice the defendants. Therefore, the plaintiffs' claims were dismissed without prejudice.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 5
    At a glance
    Powered by AI
    The case involves two plaintiffs, Don Forward and The Titusville Patriots, voluntarily dismissing their claims in a lawsuit without prejudice.

    The case involves a lawsuit filed by South Florida Tea Party, Inc. and others against Tea Party and others.

    The plaintiffs filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal without prejudice to dismiss all claims asserted by them in the case.

    Case 9:10-cv-80062-KAM Document 51 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/08/2010 Page 1 of 5

    IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT


    IN AND FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

    SOUTH FLORIDA TEA PARTY, INC.,


    A Florida non-profit corporation, et al.,

    Plaintiffs,

    v. CASE NO.: 10-80062-CV-MARRA/JOHNSON

    TEA PARTY, et al.

    Defendants.
    _________________________________/

    PLAINTIFFS DON FORWARD AND THE TITUSVILLE PATRIOTS’


    NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE

    Plaintiffs, DON FORWARD AND THE TITUSVILLE PATRIOTS, pursuant to Rule

    41(a)(1)(A)(i) or alternatively pursuant to 42(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,

    hereby gives notice of their voluntary dismissal of all claims asserted by them, without prejudice,

    in the above-entitled matter.

    Specifically, Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) sets out that a Plaintiff may voluntarily dismiss its

    claims without prejudice and without a Court Order by notice at any time prior to the Defendants

    filing an Answer or moving for summary judgment. As of the filing of this Notice, no Defendant

    has filed an Answer in this action. Further, while the Defendants have moved for summary

    judgment, the Court denied the Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment without prejudice

    essentially ruling that the same was prematurely filed. (D.E. 32). In light thereof, Plaintiffs

    assert that voluntary dismissal by notice alone should be appropriate under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i).

    Alternatively, Plaintiffs request voluntary dismissal without prejudice pursuant to Rule

    42(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule 42(a)(2) permits voluntary dismissal

    without prejudice “by court order, on terms that the court considers proper.” Voluntary dismissal

    1
    Case 9:10-cv-80062-KAM Document 51 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/08/2010 Page 2 of 5

    without prejudice pursuant to Rule 42(a)(2) “should be granted unless a defendant would suffer

    clear legal prejudice, other than the prospect of a subsequent lawsuit as a result.” See U.S. v.

    Maloney, 2007 WL 1424228, *2 (S.Dist.Fla. 2007)(Marra, J.)(quoting Ponteberg v. Boston

    Scientific Corp., 252 F.3d 1253, 1255 (11th Cir. 2001)).

    Granting the Plaintiffs’ request for voluntary dismissal will not cause any prejudice to the

    Defendants. Therefore, voluntary dismissal without prejudice is justified in this action.

    Dated: July 8, 2010

    Respectfully Submitted,

    By: /s/ FRANK HERRERA


    Frank Herrera
    Florida Bar No. 494801
    Email: [email protected]
    Gustavo Sardiña
    Florida Bar No. 31162
    Email: [email protected]
    QUINTAIROS, PRIETO, WOOD & BOYER, P.A.
    9300 S. Dadeland Blvd.
    Fourth Floor
    Miami, Florida 33156
    Telephone: 305-670-1101
    Facsimile: 305-670-1161
    And
    Timothy Lucero, Esq.
    LUCERO LAW GROUP
    10693 Wiles Road, Suite 159
    Coral Springs, Florida 33076
    Tel.: (954) 592-5277
    Email: [email protected]

    Attorneys for Plaintiffs

    2
    Case 9:10-cv-80062-KAM Document 51 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/08/2010 Page 3 of 5

    CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

    I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy hereof is being filed via the Court’s CM/ECF online
    filing system, and that the same is being served on the Defendants, namely:

    The Tea Party and


    Frederic B. O’Neal, Esq.
    P.O. Box 842
    Windermere, Florida 34786

    Nicholas Egoroff
    5402 Andover Drive
    Orlando, Florida 32812

    Douglas Guetzloe
    P.O. Box 531101
    Orlando, Florida 32853

    via U.S. Mail this 8th day of July, 2010.

    By: _s/GUSTAVO SARDIÑA___


    Gustavo Sardiña

    3
    Case 9:10-cv-80062-KAM Document 51 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/08/2010 Page 4 of 5

    IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT


    IN AND FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

    SOUTH FLORIDA TEA PARTY, INC.,


    A Florida non-profit corporation, et al.,

    Plaintiffs,

    v. CASE NO.: 10-80062-CV-MARRA/JOHNSON

    TEA PARTY, et al.

    Defendants.
    _________________________________/

    ORDER

    THIS CAUSE came before the Court on Plaintiffs DON FORWARD AND THE

    TITUSVILLE PATRIOTS’ Notice of Voluntary Dismissal, filed on July 8, 2010 [D.E. __].

    Upon review of this motion, and for good cause shown, the Court states as follows:

    Plaintiffs note that they may, pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i), voluntarily dismiss their

    claims prior to the Defendants having Answered or moved for summary judgment, that the

    Defendants have not Answered, and that the Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment was

    denied as prematurely filed. Thus, it is the Plaintiffs’ position that they may voluntarily dismiss

    their claims by notice alone.

    Alternatively, Plaintiffs ask that the Court allow them to voluntarily dismiss their claims

    without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2) as the Defendants will suffer no prejudice.

    Regardless of whether dismissal would be under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) or Rule 41(a)(2), the

    result would be the same. The Court agrees that the Defendants will not be prejudiced by

    voluntary dismissal, and grants the relief sought in Plaintiffs’ Notice.

    4
    Case 9:10-cv-80062-KAM Document 51 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/08/2010 Page 5 of 5

    ORDERED that Plaintiffs DON FORWARD AND THE TITUSVILLE PATRIOTS’

    claims in this action are dismissed without prejudice.

    DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers, this __ day of _____, 2010.

    ____________________________
    United States District Judge

    You might also like