Pratt v. State of Nebraska Department of Corrections et al, No. 8:2014cv00392 - Document 11 (D. Neb. 2014)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION that Plaintiff's "Motion to Withdraw 1983 Complaint" (Filing No. 10), which the Court liberally construes as a motion to voluntarily dismiss, will be granted. A separate order will be entered in accordance with this memorandum opinion. Ordered by Senior Judge Lyle E. Strom. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (MBM)
Pratt v. State of Nebraska Department of Corrections et al Doc. 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA JUNEAL PRATT ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) STATE OF NEBRASKA DEPARTMENT ) OF CORRECTIONS, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ______________________________) 8:14CV392 MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the Court on plaintiff’s “Motion to Withdraw 1983 Complaint” (Filing No. 10), which the Court liberally construes as a motion to voluntarily dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41. Rule 41(a) states that a plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by filing “a notice of dismissal before the opposing party serves either an answer or a motion for summary judgment.” 41(a)(1)(A)(i). Fed. R. Civ. P. In addition, Rule 41(a)(2) provides that an action may be dismissed at the plaintiff’s request “on terms that the court considers proper.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2). defendants have not been served with process. Here, Plaintiff’s “Motion to Withdraw 1983 Complaint” (Filing No. 10), which the Court liberally construes as a motion to voluntarily dismiss, Dockets.Justia.com will be granted. A separate order will be entered in accordance with this memorandum opinion. DATED this 8th day of December, 2014. BY THE COURT: /s/ Lyle E. Strom ____________________________ LYLE E. STROM, Senior Judge United States District Court * This opinion may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. The U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their Web sites. Likewise, the Court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their Web sites. The Court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the Court.