PATRICK
v.
ATLANTIC ANIMAL HEALTH, INC.

M.D. Fla. | 2025-09-22
No. 6:24-cv-2067
2025 FFL 24866 District Court, M.D. Florida (2025) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

A stipulation of dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) is ineffective if not signed by all parties who have appeared in the case.


Facts & Procedural History

Plaintiff and one defendant filed a stipulation of dismissal, citing Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). However, the stipulation was not signed by all parties who …

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.

Opinion of the Court

Plaintiff and Defendant Atlantic Animal Health, Inc. have filed a Stipulation of Dismissal (Doc. 67), purporting to dismiss all claims against Defendant Atlantic Animal Health, Inc. and citing Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) as the basis for the Stipulation.

Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) provides that "the plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by filing . . . a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared." Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). But the Stipulation (Doc. 67) is signed only by Plaintiff and Defendant Atlantic Animal Health, Inc. rather than "by all parties who have appeared" as required by Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). See Hardnett v. Equifax Info. Servs., LLC, No. 21-13195, 2023 WL 2056285 (11th Cir. 2023); see also City of Jacksonville v. Jacksonville Hosp. Holdings, L.P., 82 F. 4th 1031 (11th Cir. 2023). Thus, the Stipulation is not effective to dismiss

Plaintiff's claims against Atlantic Animal Health, Inc. All claims in this case remain pending.

DONE and ORDERED in Orlando, Florida, on September 22, 2025.

JOHN ANTOON II United States District Judge

Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • …But the Stipulation (Doc. 67) is signed only by Plaintiff and Defendant Atlantic Animal Health, Inc. rather than “by all parties who have appeared” as required by Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). See Hardnett v. Equifax Info. Servs., LLC, No. 21-13195, 2023 WL 2056285 (11th Cir. 2023); see also City of Jacksonville v. Jacksonville Hosp. Holdings, L.P., 82 F. 4th 1031 (11th Cir. 2023). Thus, the Stipulation is not effective to dismiss Plaintiffs claims against Atlantic Animal Health, Inc. All claims in t…
  • …(A)(i0). But the Stipulation (Doc. 69) is signed only by Plaintiff and Defendant United Airlines, Inc. rather than “by all parties who have appeared” as required by Rule 41(a)(1)(A)Gi). See Hardnett v. Equifax Info. Servs., LLC, No. 21-18195, 2023 WL 2056285 (11th Cir. 2023); see also City of Jacksonville v. Jacksonville Hosp. Holdings, L.P., 82 F. 4th 1031 (11th Cir. 2023). Thus, the Stipulation is not effective to dismiss Plaintiff's claims against United Airlines, Inc. All claims in this cas…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw