SUAREZ
v.
CUSCATLAN RESTAURANT LLC

M.D. Fla. | 2022-10-30
No. 2:22-cv-422
District Court, M.D. Florida (2022)

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 joint stipulation for dismissal with prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) is effective upon filing and requires no further court action, even in Fair Labor Standards Act cases.

Facts & Procedural History

The parties filed a Joint Stipulation for Dismissal with Prejudice in a Fair Labor Standards Act case. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii)…

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.

Topics
Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 41(A)(1)(A)(Ii) Voluntary Dismissal Fair Labor Standards Act Claim Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(a)(ii) Fair Labor Standards Act (Flsa) Claims

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 41(A)(1)(A)(Ii) Voluntary Dismissal cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court

In this Fair Labor Standards Act case, the parties have filed a Joint Stipulation for Dismissal with Prejudice. (Doc. 23.) Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) allows a plaintiff to dismiss an action voluntarily if a stipulation of dismissal is signed by all parties who have appeared. The dismissal is effective upon filing and requires no further action by the Court. See Anago Franchising, Inc. v. Shaz, LLC, 677 F. 3d 1272, 1278 (11th Cir. 2012).1 The text of the FLSA does not provide, and no Eleventh Circuit decision has ever held, that FLSA claims are exempt from Rule 41. To the contrary, the

Rental Suncoast, LLC, 335 F.R.D. 458, 461-462 (M.D. Fla. 2020) (holding parties may terminate an FLSA case by filing either a Rule 41 stipulation of dismissal with prejudice or a Rule 68(a) notice of acceptance of an offer of judgment “and the district court is immediately powerless to interfere”); see also Dicomo v. KJIMS Dev. Co., Inc., No. 2:16-cv-327-FtM-99CM, 2016 WL 6678420, *1 (M.D. Fla. Nov. 14, 2016) (“[T]he parties may dismiss [an FLSA] case in its entirety pursuant to the Joint Stipulation for Dismissal With Prejudice without further action from the Court as it is unconditional and self-

executing.”). Accordingly, this action is dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment, deny all pending motions, terminate all scheduled events, and close the case.

ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida this October 30, 2022. Le C. Dudek United States Magistrate Judge

Footnotes
1 Unless otherwise indicated, all internal quotation marks, citations, and alterations have been omitted in this and later citations. Eleventh Circuit has reasoned that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure apply “in actions brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act no less than in any other case.” Vasconcelo v. Miami Auto Max, Inc., 981 F. 3d 934, 942 (11th Cir. 2020) (holding that Rule 68’s cost-shifting provisions trump the FLSA’s costshifting provisions). And there is “no distinction” between the operation of Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) and Rule 68 in an FLSA action. See Casso-Lopez v. Beach Time

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw