Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01318/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01318-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1981 Civil Rights

---

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 _____________________________________________________________________

Stipulation re: Dismissal of the Entire Matter with Prejudice

B.C. BARMANN, SR., COUNTY COUNSEL

COUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA

By Jennifer Thurston, Deputy (#191821) 

Administrative Center

1115 Truxtun Avenue, Fourth Floor

Bakersfield, California 93301

Telephone: (661) 868-3800

Attorney for Defendants, County of Kern,

Kern County Sheriff’s Department, 

F. Banuelos, Amado

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHERYL LEE ) CASE NO: 1:05-CV-01318-AWI TAG

)

Plaintiff, ) STIPULATION RE: DISMISSAL OF

) THE ENTIRE ACTION WITH

v. ) PREJUDICE; ORDER AND 

) JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL

COUNTY OF KERN; KERN )

COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT; )

DEPUTY D. LINDINI, DEPUTY F. )

BANUELOS, DEPUTY AMADO, )

HOLTZ and DOES 1 to 100, inclusive, )

)

Defendants. )

_________________________________)

The parties herein, by and through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate as

follows:

WHEREAS the plaintiff, Cheryl Lee, wishes to dismiss the matter as to all

defendants in its entirety;

And WHEREAS the plaintiff and the defendants have agreed to bear their own

costs and attorney’s fees;

///

///

///

Case 1:05-cv-01318-AWI-TAG Document 30 Filed 11/17/06 Page 1 of 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 _____________________________________________________________________

Stipulation re: Dismissal of the Entire Matter with Prejudice

2

The parties do hereby STIPULATE AND AGREE that the action in its entirety is

dismissed with prejudice and that a judgment of dismissal should be entered.

The parties agree that this stipulation may be signed in counterpart.

Dated: November 15, 2006 B.C. BARMANN, SR., COUNTY COUNSEL

By /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

Jennifer Thurston, Deputy

Attorneys for Defendants, County of Kern, Kern

County Sheriff’s Department, F. Banuelos and K.

Amado

DATED: November 10, 2006 LAW OFFICES OF ROBINSON & KELLAR

By: /s/ Oliver U. Robinson 

Oliver Robinson, Esq.

Michael Kellar, Esq.

Attorney for Defendants D. Lindini and Holtz

DATED: November 15, 2006 RODRIGUEZ & ASSOCIATES

By: /s/ Marshall S. Fontes 

Daniel Rodriguez, Esq.

Marshall Scott Fontes, Esq.

Attorneys for Plaintiff, Cheryl Lee

ORDER

The parties seek dismissal of this action pursuant to Rule 41(a) ofthe Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure. Rule 41(a)(1), in relevant part, reads:

an action may be dismissed by the plaintiff without order of court (i) by filing a

notice of dismissal at any time before service by the adverse party of an answer

or of a motion for summary judgment, whichever first occurs, or (ii) by filing a

stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared in the action.

Unless otherwise stated in the notice of dismissal or stipulation, the dismissal is

without prejudice, except that a notice of dismissal operates as an adjudication

upon the merits when filed by a plaintiff who has once dismissed in any court of

Case 1:05-cv-01318-AWI-TAG Document 30 Filed 11/17/06 Page 2 of 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 _____________________________________________________________________

Stipulation re: Dismissal of the Entire Matter with Prejudice

3

the United States or of any state an action based on or including the same claim.

Rule 41(a)(1)(ii) thus allows the parties to dismiss an action voluntarily, after service of an answer,

by filing a written stipulation to dismiss signed by all of the parties who have appeared, although an

oral stipulation in open court will also suffice. Carter v. Beverly Hills Sav. & Loan Asso., 884 F.2d

1186, 1191 (9th Cir. 1989); Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1472-73 (9th Cir. 1986). Once the

stipulation between the parties who have appeared is properly filed or made in open court, no order

of the court is necessary to effectuate dismissal. Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 41(a)(1)(ii); Eitel, 782 F.2d at

1473 n.4. Because Plaintiff has filed a stipulation for dismissal with prejudice as to all parties under

Rule 41(a)(1)(ii) that is signed by all parties who have made an appearance, this case has terminated.

See Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 41(a)(1)(ii); In re Wolf, 842 F.2d at 466; Gardiner, 747 F.2d at 1189; see also

Gambale, 377 F.3d at 139; Commercial Space Mgmt, 193 F.3d at 1077; cf. Wilson, 111 F.3d at 692.

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED and the Clerk of the

Court is DIRECTED to close this case in light of the parties’ filed and signed Rule 41(a)(1)(ii)

Stipulation For Dismissal With Prejudice. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 17, 2006 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-01318-AWI-TAG Document 30 Filed 11/17/06 Page 3 of 3