Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-almd-2_03-cv-01101/USCOURTS-almd-2_03-cv-01101-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 110
Nature of Suit: Insurance
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Insurance Contract

---

1 Cf. Pennsylvania R. Co. v. Daoust Const. Co., 193 F.2d 659, 661 (7th Cir. 1952)

(holding that a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim is not a responsive pleading

under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(c) and, thus, does not preclude voluntary dismissal under Fed. R.

Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(i)).

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

MILDRED LEMUEL, as administratrix )

of the estate of Darnell Eugene Lemuel, )

deceased, et al., ) 

 )

Plaintiffs, ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:03cv1101-D 

 ) (LEAD CASE) 

v. ) (consolidated with civil action 

 ) numbers 2:03cv1102-D and

 ) 2:04cv942-D) 

ADMIRAL INS. CO., ) 

 ) (WO)

Defendant. )

 

ORDER

Having reviewed Lifestar Response of Alabama, Inc.'s Notice of Dismissal (Doc.

No. 68), and the Notice having been filed before service of a "responsive pleading" and

"before the introduction of evidence at the trial or hearing,"1 Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(c), the

court finds that, pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(i) and (c) of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure, no action by the court is necessary to effectuate a dismissal without prejudice

of the third-party complaint against Bert P. Taylor and Taylor & Smith, P.C., and the

counterclaim against Admiral Insurance Company (Doc. No. 54).

Case 2:03-cv-01101-ID-CSC Document 69 Filed 07/08/05 Page 1 of 2
2

Based on the foregoing dismissal, it is CONSIDERED and ORDERED that the

Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 65), filed by Bert P. Taylor and Taylor & Smith, P.C., be

and the same is hereby DENIED as moot.

Done this 8th day of July, 2005.

/s/ Ira DeMent 

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:03-cv-01101-ID-CSC Document 69 Filed 07/08/05 Page 2 of 2