Summary
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana denied Jenna Combel’s motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2) to dismiss without prejudice the class action claims and allegations while leaving her individual claims intact. The court held that, under binding Fifth Circuit precedent, Rule 41 does not permit dismissal of individual claims, and noted that the proposed amendment to Rule 41 had not yet been adopted.
Holdings
- Court approval under Rule 23(e) was not required because the class had not been certified and had not been proposed for certification for settlement purposes.
- Rule 41(a) does not permit a plaintiff to dismiss individual claims while leaving other claims intact; therefore, Combel could not dismiss only her class-action claims under Rule 41(a)(2).
Questions Presented
- Whether court approval under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e) was required for dismissal of the class-action claims before class certification or a proposal for certification for settlement purposes.
- Whether Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2) permits a plaintiff to voluntarily dismiss individual claims while leaving other claims in the action intact.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (8)
- Adams v. USAA Casualty Insurance Co., 863 F.3d 1069, 1081-82(followed)
- Williams v. Seidenbach, 958 F.3d 341, 344(followed)
- Exxon Corp. v. Maryland Cas. Co., 599 F.2d 659, 662(followed)
- Hells Canyon Preservation Council v. U.S. Forest Service, 403 F.3d 683, 688(not followed)
- Johnston v. Cartwright, 355 F.2d 32, 39(not followed)
- Bragg v. Robertson, 54 F. Supp. 2d 653(not followed)
- Dirauf v. Berger, 506 F. Supp. 3d 254, 263(not followed)
- Guzman-Fonalledas v. Hosp. Expanol Auxilio Mutuo, 289 F. Supp. 3d 331, 333(not followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…