Jerrad Dupree Allen v. Cortez Summit, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California denied Jerrad Dupree Allen’s motion to reopen a voluntarily dismissed civil rights action. The court held that filing a notice of voluntary dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1) divested it of jurisdiction and that, even if jurisdiction existed, Allen had not established grounds for relief under Rule 60(b)(1)–(3). The court denied the remaining motions as moot.

Holdings

1. A notice of voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1) is effective upon filing, closes the file, and divests the district court of jurisdiction over the dismissed claims. Because Plaintiff's notice divested the Court of jurisdiction, the Court could not reopen the case.
2. Even assuming jurisdiction existed, Plaintiff failed to demonstrate grounds for relief under Rule 60(b)(1), (2), or (3). His allegations concerning mail problems, newly discovered evidence, and altered or falsified records were conclusory, unsupported, or failed to satisfy the applicable requirements.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Court had jurisdiction to reopen the action after Plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1).
2. Whether Plaintiff established grounds for relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(1) based on mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect.
3. Whether Plaintiff established grounds for relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(2) based on newly discovered evidence.
4. Whether Plaintiff established grounds for relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(3) based on fraud, misrepresentation, or misconduct.

Disposition

other