Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Rodgers v. Hinsley

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS


April 17, 2007

JAMES E. RODGERS, PLAINTIFF,
v.
CHARLES HINSLEY, JOHN DOE, DEBBIE MIDDENDORF AND BARBARA MUELLER, DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Herndon, District Judge

MEMORANDUM and ORDER

Now before the Court is Rodgers' Rule 41 Notice of Voluntary Dismissal (Doc. 19). Specifically, Rodgers moves to dismiss without prejudice his claims against Defendants because he has "received information that the conditions of confinement (being subjected to harmful environmental tobacco smoke) has been corrected by Defendants." (Doc. 19). Rodgers requests that the dismissal be without prejudice to allow refiling of this lawsuit in the event that Defendants violate his rights in the future. On April 16, 2007, Defendants filed a response to the notice (Doc. 21). In their response, Defendants maintain that Defendant Hinsley is no longer employed as the Warden at Menard and urge the Court to dismiss with prejudice Plaintiff's cause of action arguing that any such future claim that Plaintiff may have likely would be a new claim and against new defendants. In light of the circumstances in this case, the Court finds that dismissal without prejudice is warranted. Accordingly, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2), the Court ACKNOWLEDGES Plaintiff's notice of dismissal and DISMISSES without prejudice Plaintiff"s cause of action. The Court will close the case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

David R Herndon United States District Judge

20070417

© 1992-2007 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.