Hall v. Director, TDCJ-CID, No. 4:2020cv00052 - Document 20 (E.D. Tex. 2020)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. ORDERED Petitioner's notice of dismissal (Dkt. # 19 ) is self-effectuating and terminates the case in and of itself, and the case is DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. 41(a)(1)(A)(i). All motions by any party not previously ruled upon are DENIED. Signed by District Judge Amos L. Mazzant, III on 8/5/2020. (daj, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Hall v. Director, TDCJ-CID Doc. 20 Case 4:20-cv-00052-ALM-KPJ Document 20 Filed 08/05/20 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 180 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION MAURICE ANTIONE HALL, #1621177 VS. DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID § § § § § CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:20cv52 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Pro se Petitioner Maurice Antione Hall filed the above-styled and numbered petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On July 31, 2020, Petitioner filed a notice to voluntarily dismiss the case (Dkt. #19). Voluntary dismissals by a petitioner are governed by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A) that provides, in pertinent part that the petitioner “may dismiss an action without a court order by filing: (i) a notice of dismissal before the opposing party serves either an answer or a motion for summary judgment.” “Unless the notice…states otherwise, the dismissal is without prejudice.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(B). The notice of dismissal is self-effectuating and terminates the case in and of itself; no order or other action of the district court is required. In re Amerijet Int’l, Inc., 785 F.3d 967, 973 (5th Cir. 2015) (per curiam). Thus, once a petitioner has moved to dismiss under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i), the case is effectively terminated; the Court has no power or discretion to deny Petitioner’s right to dismiss or to attach any condition or burden to that right. Williams v. Ezell, 531 F.2d 1261, 1264 (5th Cir. 1976); In re Amerijet Int’l, Inc., 785 F.3d at 973; Carter v. United States, 547 F.2d 258, 259 (5th Cir. 1977) (plaintiff has absolute right to dismiss his complaint under Rule 41(a) prior to the filing of an answer or motion for summary judgment). Dockets.Justia.com Case 4:20-cv-00052-ALM-KPJ Document 20 Filed 08/05/20 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 181 In the present case, neither an answer nor a motion for summary judgment has been filed; thus, Petitioner is entitled to the voluntary dismissal of the action without prejudice. Petitioner’s case was dismissed the moment the notice (Dkt. #19) was filed with the Clerk. Moreover, after a notice of voluntary dismissal is filed, the district court loses jurisdiction over the case. In re Amerijet Int’l, Inc., 785 F.3d at 973. . Accordingly, it is ORDERED Petitioner’s notice of dismissal (Dkt. #19) is selfeffectuating and terminates the case in and of itself, and the case is DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. 41(a)(1)(A)(i). All motions by any party not previously ruled upon are DENIED. SIGNED this 5th day of August, 2020. ___________________________________ AMOS L. MAZZANT UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2
]]>
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.
