Carter v. Hyatt Hotels Corporation

District Court, S.D. California · 3:23-cv-01838 · 2024-02-12 · Unknown

Proceeding: district
Area: civil
Panel: Cynthia Ann Bashant (author)

Analysis

A model's reading — qwen3.8-27b, prompt own-v1, 2026-10-13T21:39Z · confidence high

Plaintiffs and Defendants filed a joint motion to dismiss the action in its entirety with prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). The court granted the motion, dismissed the case with prejudice, and ordered the case closed.

What the court decided	The model
Grant of Joint Motion to Dismiss “The Court, having considered the Motion, and for good cause shown, hereby GRANTS the Motion. The above-captioned action is hereby dismissed in its entirety, as all defendants, with prejudice, with each party to bear its own attorneys’ fees and costs.”	agree with court The order correctly applies Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), which allows voluntary dismissal by stipulation signed by all parties who have appeared. The order notes that while no court order is strictly required for the dismissal to be effective, the local rules of the Southern District of California require such stipulations to be filed as a joint motion. The court's grant of the motion and dismissal with prejudice is consistent with the parties' agreement and the procedural requirements.

What the court decided

The model

Grant of Joint Motion to Dismiss

“The Court, having considered the Motion, and for good cause shown, hereby GRANTS the Motion. The above-captioned action is hereby dismissed in its entirety, as all defendants, with prejudice, with each party to bear its own attorneys’ fees and costs.”

agree with court
The order correctly applies Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), which allows voluntary dismissal by stipulation signed by all parties who have appeared. The order notes that while no court order is strictly required for the dismissal to be effective, the local rules of the Southern District of California require such stipulations to be filed as a joint motion. The court's grant of the motion and dismissal with prejudice is consistent with the parties' agreement and the procedural requirements.

The order itself: sound — The order is procedurally sound. It correctly identifies the applicable rule (Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii)), cites relevant Ninth Circuit authority (Wilson) and persuasive district court authority (Stone) to establish the right to voluntary dismissal by stipulation, and acknowledges the local rule requirement for filing such stipulations as a joint motion. The decision to grant the motion and dismiss with prejudice follows directly from the parties' joint filing and the cited legal standards.

How this analysis was made · dispute it

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JAMES CARTER, an individual, and Case No. 23-cv-1838-BAS-AHG ANASTASIA DUBOSHINA, individually 12 and as successor in interest to the estate of ORDER GRANTING PARTIES’ 13 Nico James Carter, JOINT MOTION TO DISMISS (ECF No. 13) 14 Plaintiffs, 15 v. 16 HYATT HOTELS CORPORATION; HYATT CORPORATION; PLAYA 17 HOTELS AND RESORTS, N.V.; 18 PLAYA RESORTS MANAGEMENT, LLC; PLAYA MANAGEMENT USA, 19 LLC; and DOES 1 through 100, 20 Defendants. 21 22 On January 30, 2024, Plaintiffs, James Carter and Anastasia Duboshina, 23 individually and as Successors in Interest to the Estate of Nico James Carter (“Plaintiffs”); 24 and defendants Hyatt Hotels Corporation; Hyatt Corporation; Playa Resorts Management, 25 LLC and Playa Management USA, LLC (“Defendants”) filed a joint motion to dismiss all 26 defendants and the above-captioned action in its entirety with prejudice. (ECF No. 13) (the 27 “Motion”). 28 Under Rule 41(a)(1)(A), a plaintiff has an absolute right to voluntarily dismiss his 1 || action by (1) filing a notice of voluntary dismissal before a defendant has filed an answer 2 ||or moved for summary judgment, see Rule 41(a)(1)(A)Q), or (2) filing a stipulation of 3 || dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared, see Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). See also 4 || Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997). Dismissal pursuant to Rule 5 ||41(a)(1)(A)(1) is effective upon the filing of a compliant notice or stipulation. No court 6 ||order is required. See Stone v. Woodford, CIV-F-05-845 AWI-DLB, 2007 WL 527766 7 ||(E.D. Cal. Feb. 16, 2007). Nonetheless, the local civil rules of this district require that 8 || where, as here, litigants seek voluntary dismissal by filing a signed stipulation pursuant to 9 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), such a stipulation must be filed as a joint motion.! 10 The Court, having considered the Motion, and for good cause shown, hereby 11 || GRANTS the Motion. The above-captioned action is hereby dismissed in its entirety, as 12 all defendants, with prejudice, with each party to bear its own attorneys’ fees and costs. 13 || The Clerk shall close the case. 14 IT IS SO ORDERED. 15 /\ yy 16 DATED: February 12, 2024 ( itl A (pha □ 17 United States District Judge 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.