Plitz et al v. REV Recreation Group, Inc. et al, No. 1:2022cv00010 - Document 22 (N.D. Ind. 2022)

Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER: The 21 Stipulation of Dismissal as to Defendant Ford Motor Company only has no effect and will be termed as a pending motion on the Court's docket. Signed by Judge Holly A Brady on 10/13/22. (nal)

Download PDF
Plitz et al v. REV Recreation Group, Inc. et al Doc. 22 USDC IN/ND case 1:22-cv-00010-HAB-SLC document 22 filed 10/13/22 page 1 of 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA FORT WAYNE DIVISION HEATHER PLITZ, et al. Plaintiffs, v. REV RECREATION GROUP, INC, et al. Defendants. ) ) ) ) CASE NO. 1:22-CV-10-HAB-SLC ) ) ) ) OPINION AND ORDER On October 7, 2022, counsel for Plaintiff filed a Stipulated Notice of Dismissal pursuant as to Defendant Ford Motor Company only. (ECF No. 21). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a) provides the terms upon which a plaintiff can voluntarily dismiss an action. The Seventh Circuit has indicated that Rule 41(a) should be used for the limited purpose of dismissing an entire action rather than for dismissal of individual parties or piecemeal claims. Taylor v. Brown, 787 F.3d 851, 857 (7th Cir. 2015) (“Although some courts have held otherwise, we’ve said that Rule 41(a) does not speak of dismissing one claim in a suit; it speaks of dismissing an action—which is to say, the whole case.”) (first quoting Berthold Types Ltd. v. Adobe Sys. Inc., 242 F.3d 772, 777 (7th Cir. 2001); then citing Nelson v. Napolitano, 657 F.3d 586, 588 (7th Cir. 2011)). According to the Seventh Circuit then, Rule 41(a) is not the proper vehicle for dropping individual parties or claims. See Taylor,787 F.3d at 858 n.9. (“The parties indicated that it's common practice in some district courts in this circuit to allow the voluntary dismissal of individual claims under Rule 41(a). If that is true, we remind judges to use Rule 15(a) instead.”). If Plaintiff desires, instead, to amend the complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) Dockets.Justia.com USDC IN/ND case 1:22-cv-00010-HAB-SLC document 22 filed 10/13/22 page 2 of 2 to remove Ford Motor Company, leave is so granted. Plaintiff has until October 27, 2022, to file an Amended Complaint. CONCLUSION For the reasons stated above, the Stipulation of Dismissal as to Defendant Ford Motor Company only (ECF No. 21), has no effect and will be termed as a pending motion on the Court’s docket. SO ORDERED on October 13, 2022. s/ Holly A. Brady JUDGE HOLLY A. BRADY UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.