Phills v. PSC Industrial Outsourcing, LP et al, No. 2:2013cv03753 - Document 18 (E.D. La. 2013)
Court Description: ORDER and REASONS granting 12 Motion to Dismiss Case, as stated within document. Signed by Judge Kurt D. Engelhardt on 7/29/2013. (cbs) Modified on 7/29/2013 to edit document type (cbs).
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Phills v. PSC Industrial Outsourcing, LP et al Doc. 18 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA RODERICK PHILLS CIVIL ACTION VERSUS NO. 13-3753 PSC INDUSTRIAL OUTSOURCING, LP, ET AL SECTION "N" (3) ORDER AND REASONS Before the Court is a motion for voluntary dismissal, filed by plaintiff pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2), (Rec. Doc. 12). “The purpose of Rule 41(a)(2) is primarily to prevent voluntary dismissals which unfairly affect the other side, and to permit the imposition of curative conditions.” Manshack v. Southwestern Elec. Power Co., 915 F.2d 172, 174 (5th Cir. 1990) (quoting 9 C. WRIGHT & A. MILLER, FEDERAL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE § 2364 at 165 (1971)) (internal quotations omitted). Thus, “courts have generally followed the traditional principle that dismissal should be allowed unless the defendant will suffer some plain legal prejudice other than the mere prospect of a second lawsuit.” Id. In this case, the defendants will suffer no unfair prejudice from the plaintiff’s voluntary dismissal. The case was filed on April 10, 2013 and removed to this Court on May 22, 2013. There has been no motion practice. A scheduling order was just issued two days ago and had not been issued at the time the motion was filed on July 3, 2013. Hilcorp Dockets.Justia.com Energy Company’s1 sole objection is that the plaintiff might re-file his suit in Lafayette, Louisiana, in the Western District, which is inconvenient to Hilcorp. If this transpires, Hilcorp is free to file a motion for transfer. This is not sufficient reason to deny the plaintiff the right to dismiss his claims. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the motion (Rec. Doc. 12) is GRANTED, and the plaintiff’s claims in this matter are hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. New Orleans, Louisiana, this 29th day of July, 2013. ___________________________________ KURT D. ENGELHARDT United States District Judge 1 No other defendant opposes the plaintiff’s motion.
]]>
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.
