Court Opinion

ID: 9962140
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-22 20:00:54.287326+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:19:57.670087
License: Public Domain

USCA11 Case: 24-10474   Document: 18-1    Date Filed: 04/22/2024   Page: 1 of 3

                                                [DO NOT PUBLISH]
                                 In the
                United States Court of Appeals
                        For the Eleventh Circuit

                         ____________________

                              No. 24-10474
                         Non-Argument Calendar
                         ____________________

       DAVID BEAR,
                                                    Plaintiﬀ-Appellee,
       versus
       DOUGLAS B. UNDERHILL,

                                                Defendant-Appellant,

       ESCAMBIA COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY
       COMMISSIONERS, et al.,

                                                          Defendant.
USCA11 Case: 24-10474      Document: 18-1      Date Filed: 04/22/2024     Page: 2 of 3

       2                      Opinion of the Court                  24-10474

                            ____________________

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Northern District of Florida
                   D.C. Docket No. 3:19-cv-04424-MCR-HTC
                           ____________________

       Before JORDAN, ROSENBAUM, and JILL PRYOR, Circuit Judges.
       PER CURIAM:
              Upon review of the record and the parties’ responses to the
       jurisdictional question, this appeal is DISMISSED for lack of juris-
       diction.
              The parties’ July 12, 2022 stipulation of dismissal of Count V
       of the amended complaint was invalid under Federal Rule of Civil
       Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) because that Rule permits dismissal only
       of “an entire action,” and not particular claims. See Rosell v. VMSB,
       LLC, 67 F.4th 1141, 1144 (11th Cir. 2023). The district court’s
       March 25, 2023 ruling that Count V was moot, pursuant to the de-
       fective July 12, 2022 stipulation, was thus also ineffective to resolve
       Count V. See id.
              Although we have recognized that a plaintiff may dismiss all
       claims against a particular defendant under Rule 41(a), see id., the
       stipulation did not resolve all claims asserted against either Douglas
       Underhill or the Escambia County Board of County Commission-
       ers. Further, we decline to construe the stipulation as an attempt
       to abandon Count V, as the stipulation expressly invoked Rule
USCA11 Case: 24-10474     Document: 18-1      Date Filed: 04/22/2024    Page: 3 of 3

       24-10474               Opinion of the Court                        3

       41(a)(1)(A)(ii) and was not styled in any way as an abandonment of
       Count V.
              Accordingly, Count V has not been resolved and remains
       pending before the district court. We thus lack jurisdiction to con-
       sider this appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291; Supreme Fuels Trading FZE v.
       Sargeant, 689 F.3d 1244, 1246 (11th Cir. 2012).