Opinion

Crouch v. Pollack

Court
District Court, S.D. Illinois
Filed
Apr 27, 2021
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 21.2%

“In a multiple defendant case, it is permissible to voluntarily dismiss just some of the defendants.”

How later courts described this case

  • “In a multiple defendant case, it is permissible to voluntarily dismiss just some of the defendants.”

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

AUTUMN N. CROUCH, Special )

Administrator of the Estate of Jacob Russell )

Steward, deceased, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. ) Case No. 17-CV-1089-SMY

)

TAYLOR LOGISTICS COMPANY, LLC, )

POLLOCK LOGISTICS, LLC, JEFFREY )

F. HALL, JR., HALL )

TRANSPORTATION, LLC, and DEBRA )

K. POLLOCK, individually and as Personal )

Representative of the Estate of Walter )

Pollock, Deceased, )

)

Defendants. )

)

AND )

)

KIMBERLY D. BOSEL, Individually, and )

as Independent Representative of the Estate )

of Eric A. Bosel, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. ) Case No. 17-CV-1280-SMY

)

TAYLOR LOGISTICS COMPANY, LLC, )

POLLOCK LOGISTICS, LLC, JEFFREY )

F. HALL, JR., HALL )

TRANSPORTATION, LLC, and DEBRA )

K. POLLOCK, individually and as Personal )

Representative of the Estate of Walter )

Pollock, Deceased, )

)

Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

YANDLE, District Judge:

Now pending before the Court is the Stipulation of Dismissal without prejudice with

respect to the claims asserted against Defendants Debra K. Pollock, individually, and Pollock

Logistics, LLC, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i1) (Doc. 226).

Rule 41 permits voluntary dismissals under certain circumstances, but the Rule is

circumscribed to dismissals of “actions,” not “parties” or “claims,” meaning that the rule should

not be used to cleave away one claim or one party from a larger case. See Taylor v. Brown, 787

F.3d 851, 857-58 (7th Cir. 2015). While the Court acknowledges the plain reading of the Rule,

given the number of Defendants, it finds that dismissing Defendants Debra K. Pollock,

individually, and Pollock Logistics, LLC pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(1) is appropriate in this

case. See Madsen v. Park City, 6 F. Supp. 2d 938, 943 (N.D. IIL. 1998) (“In a multiple defendant

case, it is permissible to voluntarily dismiss just some of the defendants.”).

Accordingly, Debra K. Pollock, individually, and Pollock Logistics, LLC are DISMISSED

without prejudice; Debra K. Pollock’s (individually) and Pollock Logistics, LLC’s Motions for

Summary Judgment (Docs. 215 and 216) are TERMINATED as Moot.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: April 27, 2021 Nowe KM Coll

STACI M. YANDLE

United States District Judge

Page 2 of 2

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.