RETA L. MCCANTS, AS ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF JOHNNY L. MCCANTS, DECEASED, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
FORD MOTOR COMPANY, INC., DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
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.
The court held that the district court did not err in imposing conditions on the dismissal of the plaintiff's action without prejudice.
Following a previous remand, the district court imposed conditions on the dismissal of the plaintiff's suit, including discovery limitations and reimb…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Statute Of Limitations Defense cases and more on FLexlaw
HILL, Circuit Judge:
In a previous decision in this case, 781 F. 2d 855, we vacated the order of the district court dismissing plaintiff-appellee’s action without prejudice and remanded the case to the district court for further proceedings. The district court was instructed to rule on appellant’s request that conditions be attached to any dismissal of this case without prejudice, and to set forth in writing the findings and conclusions on which the court relied in reaching its dera sion in that regard. We retained jurisdiction over the appeal.
On remand, the district court imposed conditions on the dismissal of plaintiff-ap-pellee’s suit that included limitations on discovery to be conducted by plaintiff-ap-pellee in the similar action appellee intends to file in Mississippi, limitations on the expert witnesses that appellant would be permitted to call in the action in Mississippi, and the requirement that appellee reimburse appellant $2,817.50 for the expenses appellant incurred in researching and pressing its statute of limitations defense in this action. The court’s order was amply supported by necessary findings of fact.
We invited the parties to submit supplemental memoranda if they wished to do so. Appellant indicated its satisfaction with the order of the district court, and appellee did not respond. We have carefully considered the opinion and order of the district court and such arguments as the parties have chosen to make. The decision of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Taragan v. ELI Lilly & Co., Inc., 838 F.2d 1337 (D.C. Cir. 1988)…without the benefit of some record of the factors it took into consideration in reaching its decision. We thus remand the case____ 781 F. 2d at 861. The court of appeals subsequently affirmed the fee award that the district court imposed on remand. 789 F. 2d 1539 (11th Cir.1986). McCants relied on LeCompte v. Mr. Chip, Inc., 528 F. 2d 601, 604 (5th Cir.1976). There, the trial court granted a motion to dismiss under Rule 41(a)(2) on the condition that a new suit be filed only with the court’s permission. The…
Authorities Cited
- Reta L. McCANTS v. Ford Motor Co., Inc., 781 F.2d 855 (11th Cir. 1986)