From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Furtick v. Cotter

United States District Court, D. South Carolina
Nov 30, 2010
Civil Action No. 1:10-cv-923-RMG (D.S.C. Nov. 30, 2010)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 1:10-cv-923-RMG.

November 30, 2010


ORDER


Before the Court is Plaintiff's motion for voluntary dismissal. (Dkt. No. 21). Defendants have not filed a response to the Plaintiff's motion. The United States Magistrate Judge has issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that Plaintiff's motion be granted and the case dismissed without prejudice. (Dkt. No. 28).

Having reviewed the entire Record and in light of Defendants having filed no response to the Plaintiff's motion, this Court adopts the Magistrate Judge's R R and grants Plaintiff's motion to voluntarily dismiss. Plaintiff's action is dismissed without prejudice. See Davis v. USX Corp., 819 F.2d 1270, 1273 (4th Cir. 1987) (noting that the main purpose of Rule 41(a)(2) is to freely permit voluntary dismissals while safeguarding the non-movant from prejudice). Here the motion for voluntary dismissal was filed just fourteen days after Defendants answered so granting this motion does not prejudice the Defendants. Finally, in light of this Order, Docket Entry No. 26 is now moot.

AND IT IS SO ORDERED.

November 30, 2010

Charleston, South Carolina


Summaries of

Furtick v. Cotter

United States District Court, D. South Carolina
Nov 30, 2010
Civil Action No. 1:10-cv-923-RMG (D.S.C. Nov. 30, 2010)
Case details for

Furtick v. Cotter

Case Details

Full title:Derrick Furtick, Plaintiff, v. Sgt. Daniel Cotter, Ofc. Robertson, and…

Court:United States District Court, D. South Carolina

Date published: Nov 30, 2010

Citations

Civil Action No. 1:10-cv-923-RMG (D.S.C. Nov. 30, 2010)