23' TRITOON PONTOON BOAT SEA BREEZE 232

M.D. Fla. | 2021-07-02

District Court, M.D. Florida (2021)

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

The court granted the parties' joint motion to dismiss the limitation of liability proceeding with prejudice.

Facts & Procedural History

Suntex Marina Investors LLC and Emily Irvine, the only remaining parties in a limitation of liability proceeding, jointly moved to dismiss the action.…

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

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Topics

Limitation Of Liability Proceedings Legal Prejudice Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 41(A)(2) Voluntary Dismissal

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Limitation Of Liability Proceedings cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court

and SMI TRS OPCO, LLC, as owners

Petitioners, ____________________________________/

ORDER1

Before the Court is the parties’ Joint Agreed Motion to Globally Dismiss Suntex Marina Investors LLC’s Limitation of Liability Proceeding. (Doc. 124). This suit is about injuries that Emily Irvine suffered while on a boat owned by Limitation Petitioner Suntex Marina Investors, LLC (and its wholly owned subsidiaries and related entities).2 Suntex and Irvine are the only remaining parties, and they have agreed to dismiss the action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a).

They thus ask the Court to dismiss this entire limitation proceeding with prejudice. After review of the record and applicable law, the Court finds good cause to dismiss this action with prejudice. Accordingly, it is now

ORDERED: 1. The Joint Agreed Motion to Globally Dismiss Suntex Marina Investor, LLC’s Limitation of Liability Proceeding (Doc. 124) is GRANTED. 2. The Clerk is DIRECTED to enter judgment, deny all pending

motions as moot, terminate all deadlines, and close the case. DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida this on July 2, 2021.

tite POLSTER otal

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Copies: All Parties of Record

Footnotes

1 Disclaimer: Documents hyperlinked to CM/ECF are subject to PACER fees. By using hyperlinks, the Court does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide, nor does it have any agreements with them. The Court is also not responsible for a hyperlink’s availability and functionality, and a failed hyperlink does not affect this Order. 2 The relevant subsidiaries and entities are Snook Bight Holdings, LLC, St Nook Bight, LLC, Snook Bight SMI Opco, LLC, and SMI TRS OPCO, LLC. Under Rule 41, a court may dismiss an action at the plaintiff’s request on terms the court considers proper. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2). A court has broad discretion in considering such a dismissal. See Pontenberg v. Boston Scientific Corp., 252 F. 3d 1253, 1255 (11th Cir. 2001) (citation omitted). “[I]n most cases, a [voluntary] dismissal should be granted unless the defendant will suffer clear legal prejudice, other than the mere prospect of a subsequent lawsuit, as a result.” McCants v. Ford Motor Co., Inc., 781 F. 2d 855, 856-57 (11th Cir. 1986) (emphasis in original and citations omitted). All parties to all aspects of this action have “agreed to amicably and confidentially settle and resolve all aspects of this dispute.” (Doc. 124 at 3).

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Authorities Cited

Reta L. McCANTS v. Ford Motor Co., Inc., 781 F.2d 855 (11th Cir. 1986)
Pontenberg v. Boston Sci. Corp., 252 F.3d 1253 (11th Cir. 2001)

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw