United States District Court, S.D. Alabama, Southern Division
PAUL P. PLATIS, Plaintiff,
OIL RECOVERY COMPANY, INC. OF ALABAMA, Defendant.
KATHERINE P. NELSON, District Judge.
This action is before the Court on the "Motion for Voluntary Dismissal without Prejudice of Defendant Oil Recovery Company, Inc. of Alabama" (Doc. 9) filed by the Plaintiff, Paul P. Platis ("Platis"). In the motion, Platis moves to dismiss the remaining Defendant, Oil Recovery Company, Inc. of Alabama ("ORC") (and therefore this entire action) without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2). As ORC has previously filed an answer (Doc. 6), the Court cannot construe the motion as a notice of dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i).
Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2), an action "may be dismissed at the plaintiff's request only by court order, on terms that the court considers proper." Such a dismissal is without prejudice unless otherwise specified by the Court. Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(a)(2). Regarding the Court's discretion under this Rule, the Eleventh Circuit has held:
The district court enjoys broad discretion in determining whether to allow a voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a)(2). McCants v. Ford Motor Co., Inc., 781 F.2d 855, 857 (11th Cir. 1986). "[I]n most cases, a voluntary dismissal should be granted unless the defendant will suffer clear legal prejudice, other then [sic] the mere prospect of a subsequent lawsuit, as a result." Id. at 856-57. "The crucial question to be determined is, Would the defendant lose any substantial right by the dismissal." Durham v. Florida East Coast Ry. Co., 385 F.2d 366, 368 (5th Cir. 1967). In exercising its "broad equitable discretion under Rule 41(a)(2), " the district court must "weigh the relevant equities and do justice between the parties in each case, imposing such costs and attaching such conditions to the dismissal as are deemed appropriate." McCants, 781 F.2d at 857...
Pontenberg v. Boston Scientific Corp., 252 F.3d 1253, 1255-56 (11th Cir. 2001) (per curiam). Accord Goodwin v. Reynolds, 757 F.3d 1216, 1219 (11th Cir. 2014).
On November 19, 2014, the Court ordered ORC to "file any substantive response it may have in opposition to Platis's motion to voluntarily dismiss this action without prejudice (Doc. 9) no later than Tuesday, November 25, 2014[, ]" informing ORC that if no such response was filed, "the motion w[ould] be deemed unopposed and the Court w[ould] unconditionally grant the motion on November 26, 2014." (Doc. 10 at 2).
The Court's deadline has passed, with ORC having filed no response in opposition to Platis's motion. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Platis's "Motion for Voluntary Dismissal without Prejudice of Defendant Oil Recovery Company, Inc. of Alabama" (Doc. 9) is GRANTED and that this action is DISMISSED without prejudice.
Final judgment in accordance with this Order and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58 ...