SUMTER
v.
THE CITY OF ORLANDO
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 it would decline supplemental jurisdiction over remaining state law claims after federal claims were voluntarily dismissed.
Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed her federal claims against one defendant, leaving only state law claims and counterclaims between the parties. The cou…
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 Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 41(A)(1)(A)(I) cases and more on FLexlaw
Plaintiff has filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal of Claims Against the City of Orlando (Doc. 26). Through this Notice, Plaintiff—as is her right under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i)—has dismissed with prejudice all of her claims against the City. See Plains Growers, Inc. v. Ickes-Braun Glasshouses, Inc., 474 F. 2d 250, 253 (5th Cir. 1973)!; accord Corley v. Long- Lewis, Inc., 965 F.8d 1222, 1226-27 (11th Cir. 2020); Klay v. United Healthgroup, Inc., 376 F. 3d 1092, 1105-06 (11th Cir. 2004). The only remaining claims in this case are Plaintiffs state law claim of battery against Defendant Roderick Williams, (see Doc. 1 at 19-20), and
Williams’s two state law counterclaims against Plaintiff, (see Doc. 15 at 13-16). All claims over which this Court had original jurisdiction having been dismissed, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c) the Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining claims. Accordingly, itis ORDERED as follows:
1. Plaintiffs claim against Defendant Roderick Williams and
Williams’s counterclaims against Plaintiff are DISMISSED without prejudice to those claims being refiled in state court. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(d), the period of limitations for these claims is “tolled while the claim is pending and for a period of 30 days after it is dismissed unless State law provides for a longer tolling period.”
2. All pending motions are DENIED as moot.
3. The Clerk is directed to close this case.
1 ROT DONE and ORDERED in Orlando, Florida)\on April !-~ 2021:
Less \
OHN ANTOON II
United States District Judge Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Bonner v. City OF Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206 (11th Cir. 1981)
- Leonard J. Klay, M.D. v. United Healthgroup, Inc., 376 F.3d 1092 (11th Cir. 2004)