Agadzhanova v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Cynthia Ann Bashant (author)
Analysis
The parties filed a joint stipulation seeking dismissal of the action with prejudice. The court granted the stipulation, construed it as a joint motion, and dismissed the case with prejudice.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Joint motion to dismiss with prejudice granted“Accordingly, the Court, having considered the Stipulation, and for good cause shown, hereby DISMISSES the case. The above-captioned action is hereby dismissed in its entirety, with prejudice, with each party to bear its own attorneys’ fees and costs.” | agree with court The parties jointly stipulated to dismissal with prejudice. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), a plaintiff may dismiss an action by filing a stipulation signed by all parties who have appeared. The court correctly noted that while no court order is strictly required for the dismissal to be effective, local rules require such stipulations to be filed as joint motions. The court properly construed the stipulation as a joint motion and granted it. The decision to dismiss with prejudice and allocate costs to the parties is consistent with the terms of the stipulation and standard practice for voluntary dismissals by agreement. |
The order itself: sound — The order correctly identifies the applicable rule (Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii)) and the relevant local procedural requirement (filing as a joint motion). It accurately states that the dismissal is effective upon filing but grants the motion to satisfy local rules and close the case. The reasoning is concise and legally sound for a procedural dismissal by stipulation.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RUZANNA AGADZHANOVA, Case No. 23-cv-1834-BAS-JLB Plaintiff, 12 v. 13 ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION TO DISMISS WITH 14 PREJUDICE (ECF No. 12) MERCEDES-BENZ USA, LLC, 15 Defendant. 16 17 On March 4, 2024, Plaintiff Ruzanna Agadzhanova and Defendant Mercedes-Benz 18 USA, LLC submitted a joint stipulation for dismissal of the instant action with prejudice. 19 (ECF No. 12) (the “Stipulation”). 20 Under Rule 41(a)(1)(A), a plaintiff has an absolute right to voluntarily dismiss his 21 action by (1) filing a notice of voluntary dismissal before a defendant has filed an answer 22 or moved for summary judgment, see Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i), or (2) filing a stipulation of 23 dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared, see Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). See also 24 Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997). Dismissal pursuant to Rule 25 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) is effective upon the filing of a compliant notice or stipulation. No court 26 order is required. See Stone v. Woodford, CIV-F-05-845 AWI-DLB, 2007 WL 527766 27 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 16, 2007). Nonetheless, the local civil rules of this district require that 28 where, as here, litigants seek voluntary dismissal by filing a signed stipulation pursuant to 1 || Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), such a stipulation must be filed as a joint motion.! 2 In the interests of justice and judicial economy, the Court shall construe the parties’ 3 || Stipulation as the requisite joint motion. Accordingly, the Court, having considered the 4 || Stipulation, and for good cause shown, hereby DISMISSES the case. The above-captioned 5 action is hereby dismissed in its entirety, with prejudice, with each party to bear its own 6 || attorneys’ fees and costs. The Clerk shall close the case. 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 ) 9 || DATED: March 7, 2024 Lin A (Lyohaa 6 10 United States District Judge 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 || ——_—— 28 See Electronic Case Filing Administrative Policies and Procedures Manual, United States District Court for the Southern District of California. 4.