Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-01856/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-01856-9/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Plaintiff Alvaro Quezada (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action currently proceeds against 

Defendants Fisher, Jose, Doria, Scott and Ortiz for violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the 

United States Constitution.

I. Background

On October 1, 2015, Plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal of Defendant Scott, pursuant 

to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a). (ECF No. 72.) In his filing, Plaintiff states that he is informed Defendant Scott 

is deceased, and as a result he wishes to dismiss Defendant Scott from this action. He further extends

his condolences and sympathies to “all that have been affected by Mr. Scott’s death.” (Id. at p. 1.) He 

specifies that his intended dismissal operates only as to Defendant Scott and to no other defendants.

ALVARA QUEZADA,

 Plaintiff,

v.

FISHER, et al., 

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:09-cv-01856-LJO-BAM (PC)

ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO NOTIFY 

COURT IF HE WISHES TO WITHDRAW HIS 

REQUEST FOR A VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL OF 

DEFENDANT CORRECTIONAL OFFICER C. 

SCOTT 

(ECF No. 72)

THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE

Case 1:09-cv-01856-LJO-BAM Document 73 Filed 10/07/15 Page 1 of 3
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

II. Standard

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2), a plaintiff may request dismissal after an 

opposing party has served either an answer or a motion for summary judgment, as in this case, “only 

by court order, on terms that the court considers proper.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2). “A motion for 

voluntary dismissal pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2) should be granted unless a 

defendant can show that it will suffer some plain legal prejudice as a result of the dismissal.” Hepp v. 

Conoco, Inc., 97 F. App’x 124, 125 (9th Cir. 2004) (citations omitted). “Legal prejudice is prejudice to 

‘some legal interest, some legal claim, [or] some legal argument.’” Maxum Indem. Ins. Co. v. A-1 All 

Am. Roofing Co., 299 F. App’x 664, 666 (9th Cir. 2008) (quoting Westlands Water Dist. V. United 

States, 100 F.3d 94, 97 (9th Cir. 1996)). 

III. Discussion

The Court finds that Defendant Scott, or his successors-in-interest(s), will suffer no legal 

prejudice by being dismissed from this action. Defendant Scott did not file a counterclaim or raise any 

other issue which must be decided in this matter. 

Nevertheless, Defendant Scott or his successor(s) could be prejudiced by a dismissal without 

prejudice. Plaintiff’s allegations underlying his claim against Defendant Scott occurred over eight 

years ago, and his motion comes after months of discovery and the filing of a motion for summary 

judgment. Without any ruling on that motion or a dismissal with prejudice, Defendant Scott’s 

successor(s) could face potential re-litigation of a matter that occurred many years ago and involving a 

now-deceased witness. 

For these reasons, the Court finds that under these circumstances, if Plaintiff’s request for a 

voluntary dismissal is granted, it should be done with prejudice. A court granting a motion for 

voluntary dismissal with conditions must give the plaintiff “a reasonable period of time within which 

[either] to refuse the conditional voluntary dismissal by withdrawing [the] motion for dismissal or to 

accept the dismissal despite the imposition of conditions.” Beard v. Sheet Metal Workers Union, 908 

F.2d 474, 476 (9th Cir. 1990). Therefore, the Court shall grant Plaintiff thirty (30) days to determine 

whether he wishes to refuse the conditional voluntary dismissal recommended here.

///

Case 1:09-cv-01856-LJO-BAM Document 73 Filed 10/07/15 Page 2 of 3
3

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IV. Conclusion and Order

Accordingly, based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff shall notify the Court, within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this 

order, if he wishes to withdraw his request for voluntary dismissal filed October 1, 

2015 (ECF No. 72); and 

2. If Plaintiff’s request for voluntary dismissal is not withdrawn within thirty (30) days, 

the Court will issue an order recommending that the District Judge grant Plaintiff’s 

request and dismiss this action against Defendant Correctional Officer C. Scott with 

prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 6, 2015 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:09-cv-01856-LJO-BAM Document 73 Filed 10/07/15 Page 3 of 3